[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0910311441120.31845@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 14:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Testers List <kernel-testers@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Jose Marino <braket@...mail.com>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: Help needed, Re: [Bug #14334] pcmcia suspend regression from
2.6.31.1 to 2.6.31.2 - Dell Inspiron 600m
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> The patch is appended, please have a look.
Looks sane to me. It does the actual real socket ops early, and does the
crazy pcmcia resume late.
And I like how you abstracted out that dev->socket thing in
pcmcia_socket_dev_run().
The only thing that looks odd is how you do "socket_start_resume()" in the
"late_resume" path too - that has already been done by the early_resume,
and as far as I can see you're now initializing the socket twice.
Is there a reason for that? Or am I misreading the patch (I didn't
actually apply it, I just read the patch itself).
Linus
--
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