From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [ PATCH] Add suspend/resume for HPET was: Re: [3/6] 2.6.21-rc4: known regressions Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 22:08:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <200703281701.23876.maximlevitsky@gmail.com> <200703290641.20236.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: <200703290641.20236.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 Thu, 29 Mar 2007, Maxim wrote: > > I am sending here a patch that as was discussed here adds hpet to list o= f system devices > and adds suspend/resume hooks this way. > I tested it and it works fine. Ok, it certainly looks better, but it *also* looks like it just assumes = the HPET is there. Which would work in testing _with_ a HPET, but would = likely break on hardware without one, no? Shouldn't there be at least something like a if (!is_hpet_capable()) return 0; at the top of that init routine? I'd also expect that you'd need to check = that "hpet_virt_address" is valid or something? (Or, better yet, shouldn't we set "boot_hpet_disable" when we decide not = to use the HPET, and set hpet_virt_address to NULL?) Linus