LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <email@example.com>
To: Pavel Machek <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: Len Brown <email@example.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andrew Morton <email@example.com>,
Carlos Corbacho <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Linus Torvalds <email@example.com>,
pm list <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Shaohua Li <email@example.com>, Felix M?ller <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Arthur Erhardt <email@example.com>,
Matthew Garrett <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI PM: Restore the 2.6.24 suspend ordering
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 21:55:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
On Tuesday, 1 of April 2008, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > > > > > For the reasons outlined above, the change of the suspend ordering
> > > > > > should be reverted, which is done by the patch below.
> > > > >
> > > > > But this will break those few nvidia-based systems, no?
> > > > >
> > > > > this may have been a good idea in -rc1 days, but we are in -rc7
> > > > > now... and the patch is slightly big.
> > > >
> > > > It's quite obvious, though.
> > >
> > > Yes, but breaking systems between -rc7 and final is _very_ unnice.
> > Breaking systems between 2.6.24 and 2.6.25 is even worse, which is why
> > I've posted this patch.
> > IOW, we tried to fix systems that were broken with 2.6.24, but it didn't work,
> > because our "fix" broke systems that were OK with 2.6.24. Solution: revert
> > the "fix" and go back to the design board. That's all we can do so late in
> > the release cycle, IMO.
> Well, I agree that regression from 2.6.24 is worse, but it is
> _slightly_ worse... -rcs are really expected to improve...
> ...plus it no longer looks like macbook regression is caused by _PTS
> > > > I think we _can_ do something about the failing NVidia systems in the 2.6.26
> > > > time frame, but that will require some more consideration.
> > >
> > > We could simply blacklist them, no?
> > Yes, but for this purpose we'll have to redesign the core so that everything
> > (including debugging and the error paths) works if _PTS is executed before
> > suspending devices. _That_, however, is not a 2.6.25 thing.
> So we have solution that fixes 2.6.24 systems, makes system that
> worked in 2.6.25-rc5 work with command line option, but gets error
> handling wrong.
> I guess we could use that?
IMO we should not use that, because it's broken. That's why I posted the
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-01 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-30 1:19 Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-30 11:18 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-30 11:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-03-30 12:28 ` Pavel Machek
2008-03-30 13:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2008-04-01 8:45 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-01 14:38 ` Felix Möller
2008-04-01 19:55 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2008-04-02 13:00 ` Pavel Machek
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] ACPI PM: Restore the 2.6.24 suspend ordering' \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).