Alan Jenkins wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Saturday, 11 of October 2008, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>>   
>>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>     
>>>>> No, we discussed this before -- we are outside of the transaction, thus 
>>>>> no GPE
>>>>> activity could interfere with ec_check_ibf0.
>>>>>         
>>>> Ok, this is in the process context and we don't really expect to get an
>>>> interrupt at this point, but what happens if the EC generates an event that's
>>>> not related to any transiaction.  Is that guaranteed to never happen?
>>>>       
>>> Interrupt handler in this case can't cause a change to status register, thus our 
>>> read of it will not be affected by interrupt.
>>>     
>> Ok, thanks.
>>
>> Alan, does the patch work for you?
>>
>> Rafael
>>   
> 
> Yes.  Two reboot cycles, three suspend/resume cycles each, and no error
> message.
> 
> I hope we have a better fix in mind though :-P.  The patch doesn't solve
> the unnecessary 500ms delay when this thing happens.

Something like this?

Regards,
Alex.