From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [3/6] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:38:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200703281543.47049.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> <20070328144148.GA16244@elte.hu> <200703281701.23876.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200703281701.23876.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Maxim Cc: Jeff Chua , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@suse.de, linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, "Eric W. Biederman" , Ingo Molnar , Jens Axboe , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Thomas Gleixner , jgarzik@pobox.com, Andrew Morton List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 28 Mar 2007, Maxim wrote: > = > Now I don't have a clue how to set those bits if only HPET is used as cl= ock source because now clocksources > don't have _any_ resume hook. One thing that drives me wild about that "clocksource resume" thing is = that it seems to think that clocksources are somehow different from any = other system devices.. Why isn't the HPET considered a "device", and has it's own *device* = "suspend" and "resume"? Why do we seem to think that only "set_mode()" = etc should wake up clock sources? It's a *device*, dammit. It should save and resume like one (probably as a = system device). The "set_mode()" etc stuff is at a completely different = (higher) conceptual level. Thomas? It does seem like Maxim has hit the nail on the head (at least = partly) on the HPET timer resume problems.. Linus