On Thursday, 11 of December 2008, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:03:16 +0100, > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Thursday, 11 of December 2008, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > At Sun, 07 Dec 2008 10:47:56 +0100, > > > I wrote: > > > > > > > > At Sat, 6 Dec 2008 20:45:35 -0800, > > > > Jesse Barnes wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, December 6, 2008 6:09 am Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > Subject: Sound (HDA Intel): Restore PCI configuration space with interrupts > > > > > > off > > > > > > > > > > > > Move the restoration of the standard PCI configuration registers > > > > > > in the snd_hda_intel driver to a ->resume_early() callback executed > > > > > > with interrupts disabled, since doing that with interrupts enabled > > > > > > may lead to problems in some cases. > > > > > > > > > > > > This patch addresses the regression from 2.6.26 tracked as > > > > > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12121 . > > > > > > > > > > Since I only applied 1 and 2 you'll need to send this one through Takashi. > > > > > > > > OK, I merged it to for-next branch now. > > > > It should appear in the linux-next tree of tomorrow. > > > > > > There is no build errors at least on linux-next, but I guess the > > > testing about PM has been rarely done on linux-next kernel... > > > > > > BTW, Rafael, is this particular patch (against hda_intel.c) works in > > > general or dependent on other two patches? > > > > It should be safe without the other patches too. > > OK, but this alone doesn't make much sense without others, right? > > I'm asking this because I'm not pretty sure how this should be handled. > Certainly it must be in 2.6.29, but about for 2.6.28... Well, I think 2.6.29 would be fine. Thanks, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
