From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 ACPI: normalize segment descriptor register on resume Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:17:26 +0200 Message-ID: <200806252217.27059.rjw@sisk.pl> References: <200806242303.49498.rjw@sisk.pl> <20080624214610.GC18679@elf.ucw.cz> <20080625170126.GA2482@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ogre.sisk.pl ([217.79.144.158]:54318 "EHLO ogre.sisk.pl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751122AbYFYUPi (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:15:38 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080625170126.GA2482@elte.hu> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Pavel Machek , Len Brown , Andrew Morton , ACPI Devel Maling List , LKML , pm list On Wednesday, 25 of June 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Pavel Machek wrote: > > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek > > > > If this could be sneaked into Ingo's tree for some automated testing, > > that would be good. > > sure - i have applied it to tip/out-of-tree. I'm equally nervous about > this change - it affects every suspend+resume cycle that people do on > those boxes which are working just fine currently. > > btw., it would get a lot more coverage on my test-systems if this commit > in tip/out-of-tree: > > | commit 01259383c345d13b70efcc549439927ae64dc66d > | Author: David Brownell > | Date: Fri May 16 10:12:36 2008 +0200 > | > | sleepy linux self-test > > was upstream and if it was enabled more prominently, instead of hidden > behind the rather obscure condition of: > > config PM_TEST_SUSPEND > bool "Test suspend/resume and wakealarm during bootup" > depends on SUSPEND && PM_DEBUG && RTC_LIB=y > > and even then it needs certain other config options related to RTC_LIB > to actually work during bootup. > > As a result of all this obstruction, the automated testing i do, which > builds and boots more than 1 random kernel per minute, will only run > this self-test once every hour or so. > > I dont mind if this option breaks boxes (that its purpose: it does the > same thing that a real suspend+resume does and suspend+resume frequently > breaks boxes), but right now it's all obscured so heavily which makes > automated testing a lot harder than it should be. > > it would be wonderful if this excellent suspend+resume self-test was > upstream and was more prominent! :-) I thought it was in linux-next, wasn't it? Rafael