On Saturday, December 6, 2008 9:46 am Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, 6 of December 2008, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > I think it should go through Jesse? > > > > Probably correct. And we want it in -next, so that it can get some > > testing even before I open the merge window. Because I hope everybody > > realizes that there's no way we're doing this in 2.6.28, and we'll leave > > the broken and unreliable suspend. > > > > Because afaik this is not a new bug (I tried to push a patch to do > > suspend_late/resume_early for the PCI code a _loong_ time ago, but it > > never got merged), and the only reason it showed up as a regression was > > almost certainly simply that we've always had this. > > > > IOW, suspend/resume has always been dodgy wrt interrupts, and there's > > some luck involved. And your machine just happened to get unlucky. > > > > I'd love to fix this in 2.6.28, but it's just not reasonable - it needs > > widespread testing with an early -rc merge. And if it turns out to fix a > > lot of machines, and there are no regressions, we can always back-port it > > later. > > I agree. I'll stuff it into my -next branch tonight. -- Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
