From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Oleksandr Natalenko To: Jens Axboe Cc: Bart Van Assche , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , "Martin K . Petersen" , Ming Lei Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/10] block, scsi, md: Improve suspend and resume Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 07:02:24 +0200 Message-ID: <11010777.WJQNYl18e6@natalenko.name> In-Reply-To: <9c33db06-39e7-fd61-f146-4ae6df4302b5@kernel.dk> References: <20171017232630.4264-1-bart.vanassche@wdc.com> <9c33db06-39e7-fd61-f146-4ae6df4302b5@kernel.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-ID: I've indeed tested some previous versions of this patchset, but still use=20 Ming's solution. Can it be clarified which one (Bart's or Ming's) is a correct approach? On st=C5=99eda 18. =C5=99=C3=ADjna 2017 1:28:14 CEST Jens Axboe wrote: > On 10/17/2017 05:26 PM, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > Hello Jens, > >=20 > > It is known that during the resume following a hibernate, especially wh= en > > using an md RAID1 array created on top of SCSI devices, sometimes the > > system hangs instead of coming up properly. This patch series fixes that > > problem. These patches have been tested on top of the block layer for-n= ext > > branch. Please consider these changes for kernel v4.15. >=20 > The folks that had trouble with this issue, have they tested the > patchset? I'd like to get a solution queued up for this sooner rather > than later, but I'd greatly prefer if we had some folks that have > tested and verified it.