[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1180038102.15241.12.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 22:21:41 +0200
From: Romano Giannetti <romano.giannetti@...il.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org,
Justin Forbes <jmforbes@...uxtx.org>,
Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@....linux.org.uk>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
Chuck Wolber <chuckw@...ntumlinux.com>,
Chris Wedgwood <reviews@...cw.f00f.org>,
Michael Krufky <mkrufky@...uxtv.org>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: Long delay in resume from RAM (Was Re: [patch 00/69]
-stablereview)
On Thu, 2007-05-24 at 08:52 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Thu, 24 May 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Ok. That was probably true even before you added the suspend ordering
> > patch.
>
> Oh, no it apparently wasn't. I missed your other email that said
>
> "So, I tried to suspend without any card in the pcmcia slot. Guess what?
> I extracted the card and the system did not suspend. Just stopped dead."
>
> so apparently the patch actually did matter for you. Can you double-check
> and confirm?
>
Well, I've made a bit of a mess. The setup that has not the delay when
the card is out is a plain 2.6.21.2 (without suspend ordering).
The lockup ocurred on a 2.6.21.1 WITH the suspend ordering patch, but
was just one time, after I plugged and unplugged the card several time.
Could not reproduce it, however. Puzzled.
Romano
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists