Andi Kleen wrote: >> It still seems incredibly risky to push this for 2.6.26, especially >> given the Elan revelation. > > Do Elans even support S3? I don't know if they do, but I don't know offhand the extent of machines that may have that problem, especially since Intel now document it as "failures are readily seen". >> I think it needs to be tested on the 2.6.27 >> track, and then possibly be pushed back via the 2.6.26-stable route. > > I'm just not sure how many suspend/resume cycles people really do > on a early (pre -rc) mainline kernel (or in linux-next for that > matter). You usually have to install on a laptop and actually > use it. > > Since this code is only executed on resume some directed testing > would be better. That is what Rafael asked for in this mail. The issue is mostly if it breaks some obscure system. I have put it on my laptop, Ingo has it on this test system with a suspend-testing cycle, and so on, but the number of systems exposed is going to be small. > I think it would be ok for .26 if we can get confirmation it works > on a few systems with S3 suspend/resume. That we already know it does, but it took a long time even until the regression came to light. -hpa _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
