On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:20:24 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > The appended patch fixes a regression and is considered as 2.6.26 > > material. Everyone having a box with working suspend to RAM is gently > > requested to test it and verify if it doesn't break things. > > > > The patch applies to the current -git. > > The fix is _really_ tempting, but i think it's 2.6.26.1 material at the > earliest. I just counted about 8 red flag items in that commit: > > - "assembly code" > - "fresh change" > - "suspend/resume" > - "real-mode code" > - "ACPI" > - "SMM" > - "CPU erratas" > - "boot code" > > I'd say it's probably 90% fine, but it's just too much risk at this > stage i think. The regression was only found 2 weeks ago, and the commit > that broke it was upstream for 2 months (and was under testing for about > 4 months). Merge it into 2.6.27-rc1 and add Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> to the changelog with a note "needed in 2.6.26.x after a couple of weeks testing in mainline" or something like that. I expect 2.6.25.x will be maintained for a while yet too... _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
