From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jun'ichi Nomura" Subject: Re: 2.6.19-rc3: known unfixed regressions (v3) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:20:30 -0500 Message-ID: <4546345E.3050706@ce.jp.nec.com> References: <45462591.7020200@ce.jp.nec.com> <20061030163223.GK1941@mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20061030163223.GK1941@mellanox.co.il> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.osdl.org To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Andrew Morton , len.brown@intel.com, Linus Torvalds , linux-pm@osdl.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , Martin Lorenz List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Hi Michael, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> The code is related to bd_claim_by_disk which is called when >> device-mapper or md tries to mark the underlying devices >> for exclusive use and creates symlinks from/to the devices >> in sysfs. The patch added error handlings which weren't in >> the original code. >> >> I have no idea how it affects ACPI event handling. > = > It's a mystery. Probably exposes a bug somewhere? > = >> Are you using dm and/or md on your machine? > = > The .config is attached to bugzilla. OK, I found you disabled CONFIG_MD, which means neither dm.ko nor md.ko was built. Do you have any out-of-tree kernel modules which call either bd_claim_by_kobject or bd_claim_by_disk? If you aren't using either of them, I'm afraid reverting the patch doesn't really solve your problem because the patched code is called only from them. >> Have you seen any unusual kernel messages or symptoms regarding >> dm/md before the ACPI problem occurs? > = > I haven't. Thanks, -- = Jun'ichi Nomura, NEC Corporation of America