[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48F1BFD0.7040004@tuffmail.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:13:52 +0100
From: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
CC: Alexey Starikovskiy <astarikovskiy@...e.de>,
Alexey Starikovskiy <aystarik@...il.com>,
linux acpi <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: acpi-test tree on eeepc: EC error message on second resume
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, 11 of October 2008, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>
>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>>>> No, we discussed this before -- we are outside of the transaction, thus
>>>> no GPE
>>>> activity could interfere with ec_check_ibf0.
>>>>
>>> Ok, this is in the process context and we don't really expect to get an
>>> interrupt at this point, but what happens if the EC generates an event that's
>>> not related to any transiaction. Is that guaranteed to never happen?
>>>
>> Interrupt handler in this case can't cause a change to status register, thus our
>> read of it will not be affected by interrupt.
>>
>
> Ok, thanks.
>
> Alan, does the patch work for you?
>
> Rafael
>
Yes. Two reboot cycles, three suspend/resume cycles each, and no error
message.
I hope we have a better fix in mind though :-P. The patch doesn't solve
the unnecessary 500ms delay when this thing happens.
Thanks
Alan
--
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