> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 19:47:42 +0200 Stefan Richter <stefanr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > >>> Trying to free already-free IRQ 40 > >>> pci_set_power_state(): 0002:20:0e.0: state=3, current state=5 > >>> firewire_ohci: pci_set_power_state failed with -22<3>pci_device_suspend(): pci_suspend+0x0/0x9c [firewire_ohci]() returns -22 > > > > I grepped the whole tree for firewire_ohci and came up blank. What is it? > > drivers/firewire/fw-ohci.c -> fw-ohci.o -> firewire-ohci.o -> > firewire-ohci.ko argh. It's not the first time that the module system's weird replace-dash-with-underscore thing has fooled me. > > But yes, a failed pci_set_power_state() will hurt. Perhaps this is > > a result of some recently-added return-value checking fix but as I > > cannot find the dang code I cannot tell. > > The old ohci1394.c used to ignore pci_set_power_state's return value. > In the pre 2.6.19-rc1 commit ea6104c22468239083857fa07425c312b1ecb424, I > added a fail-on-error. This was toned down to a printk-on-err by pre > 2.6.19-rc4 commit 346f5c7ee7fa4ebee0e4c96415a7e59716bfa1d0. OK. > This was because of Benjamin Herrenschmidt's regression report: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/10/24/13 It's not clear _why_ pci_set_power_state() is failing. > A trivial post -rc1 compatible fix is coming in a minute. neato, thanks. _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
