From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] cpufreq: try to resume policies which failed on last resume Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2014 12:14:13 +0100 Message-ID: <2207601.6Y4Zru5qMP@vostro.rjw.lan> References: <87a9f92xnn.fsf@nemi.mork.no> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <87a9f92xnn.fsf@nemi.mork.no> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn?= Mork Cc: Viresh Kumar , "cpufreq@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List On Monday, January 06, 2014 11:49:00 AM Bj=C3=B8rn Mork wrote: > Viresh Kumar writes: >=20 > > On 6 January 2014 14:31, Bj=C3=B8rn Mork wrote: > >> That's correct. I have not observed this on suspend to RAM. But = then > >> again I haven't rigged any way to log that, so I don't think it's > >> conclusive.. > >> > >> The point I tried to make is that it isn't related to any hibernat= ion > >> *failures*. The warning appears even if the add_dev() is successf= ul, > >> and it also appears if I touch only the *boot* cpu cpufreq attribu= tes. > > > > Okay.. But your log below is for add_dev() failure case. >=20 > Any suggestion on how to capure warnings issued between freeze and th= aw > is appreciated :-) You can try to add no_console_suspend to the kernel's command line. Thanks! --=20 I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.