[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090903232317.GA6760@lst.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 01:23:17 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@...il.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>
Subject: Re: Regression in suspend to ram in 2.6.31-rc kernels
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 12:29:04AM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> Ok - another bisect game played - and unexpected winner is:
>
> (fat: add ->sync_fs)
>
> f83d6d46e7adf241a064a4a425e5cd8a8fd8925f
>
> Reverting this commit with current -rc8 kernel makes the system happy
> during the suspend/resume cycle. Obviously it has it price :) so just
> plain revert is probably not a good solution so the problem looks
> 'more serious' (fat is not the only fs with this patch) thus adding
> original author to this thread.
Note that when you rever this patch on a current kernel you do actually
get different behvaviour than when going back to before this commit.
In 2.6.30 we called ->write_super in the various sync functions and
then ->sync_fs, in 2.6.31-rc8 you would not call any syncing at all
anymore. I think this patch might just be a symptom for a situation
where the suspend code causes a sync and the mmc driver can't handle
it anymore.
--
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