[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFy2-vNAXSnSBoiSfvhijKXzYVmpYr1VCOb87+tgrw0B1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 12:30:52 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>
Cc: Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 4.15-rc2: Regression in resume from ACPI S3
On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> wrote:
>
> Confirmed, revert fixes it. You see how it moves fix_processor_context
> around #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 block? And how people forget 32-bit
> machines exist? Aha.
Yeah, people do.
Andy?
> Which brings me to .. various people do automated testing of
> kernel. Testing 32-bit kernel for boot, and both 32-bit and 64-bit for
> boot and suspend would be very nice. The last item is not hard, either:
>
> sudo rtcwake -l -m mem -s 5
>
> ...should take 10 seconds or so.
I'm told 0day does *some* suspend/resume testing, but I think it's
pretty limited, partly because the kinds of machines it primarily
works on don't really support suspend/resume at all. I'm also not sure
just how many of those machines are 32-bit at all..
But I'm adding Zhang Rui to the cc, to see if my recollection is right.
Because you're right, more suspend/resume automated testing would be
good to have. And yes, people test mainly 64-bit these days.
Also, I'm not even sure what the 0day rules are for just plain
mainline. I don't tend to see a lot of breakage reports, even though
I'd expect to. This came in from the x86 trees (and those do their own
tests too, but probably not suspend/resume either), but it hit my tree
fairly soon after going into the x86 -tip trees.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists