[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080701072024.GB26601@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:20:24 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
pm list <linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFT] x86 acpi: normalize segment descriptor register on resume
* Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The appended patch fixes a regression and is considered as 2.6.26
> material. Everyone having a box with working suspend to RAM is gently
> requested to test it and verify if it doesn't break things.
>
> The patch applies to the current -git.
The fix is _really_ tempting, but i think it's 2.6.26.1 material at the
earliest. I just counted about 8 red flag items in that commit:
- "assembly code"
- "fresh change"
- "suspend/resume"
- "real-mode code"
- "ACPI"
- "SMM"
- "CPU erratas"
- "boot code"
I'd say it's probably 90% fine, but it's just too much risk at this
stage i think. The regression was only found 2 weeks ago, and the commit
that broke it was upstream for 2 months (and was under testing for about
4 months).
[ We have to try to shorten the test cycle for such problems. Hopefully
in v2.6.27 we'll have CONFIG_PM_TEST_SUSPEND=y :-) ]
Ingo
--
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