From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: 2.6.21-rc1: known regressions (part 2) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:41:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20070305164133.GA2441@elte.hu> References: <20070227103407.GA17819@elte.hu> <20070227105922.GD2250@kernel.dk> <20070227111515.GA4271@kernel.dk> <20070301093450.GA8508@elte.hu> <20070301104117.GA22788@elte.hu> <20070301145204.GA25304@elte.hu> <20070302072100.GB30634@elte.hu> <20070302080441.GA12785@elte.hu> <20070305161450.GA4972@mellanox.co.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070305161450.GA4972@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: Daniel Walker , Michal Piotrowski , linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Adrian Bunk , Pavel Machek , Jens Axboe , Thomas Gleixner , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org * Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Quoting Ingo Molnar : > > git-bisect good 0539771d7236b425f285652f6f297cc7939c8f9a > > = > > 81450b73dde07f473a4a7208b209b4c8b7251d90 is first bad commit > = > I have confirmed these two on my system. you could probably get quite a bit further in bisecting the other = breakage, by using the following method: manully apply the patch below to 81450b73dde and retest. It will most = likely work. Then FIRST unapply the patch and mark the tree via = 'git-bisect good' and continue the bisection. Then try to apply the = patch again. If it's already included - ignore the rejected patch. = Whenever git-bisect offers you a new commit, just try to apply the = patch. Ok? This way you'll be able to avoid the known ACPI breakage, and = zoom in on the unknown breakage. Ingo ----------------> commit f3ccb06f3b8e0cf42b579db21f3ca7f17fcc3f38 Author: Alexey Starikovskiy Date: Tue Feb 13 02:35:50 2007 -0500 ACPI: Disable wake GPEs only once. = fixes Suspend/Resume regressions due to recent ACPICA update. = Signed-off-by: Alexey Starikovskiy Signed-off-by: Len Brown diff --git a/drivers/acpi/events/evgpe.c b/drivers/acpi/events/evgpe.c index dfac3ec..635ba44 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/events/evgpe.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/events/evgpe.c @@ -636,17 +636,6 @@ acpi_ev_gpe_dispatch(struct acpi_gpe_event_info *gpe_e= vent_info, u32 gpe_number) } } = - if (!acpi_gbl_system_awake_and_running) { - /* - * We just woke up because of a wake GPE. Disable any further GPEs - * until we are fully up and running (Only wake GPEs should be enabled - * at this time, but we just brute-force disable them all.) - * 1) We must disable this particular wake GPE so it won't fire again - * 2) We want to disable all wake GPEs, since we are now awake - */ - (void)acpi_hw_disable_all_gpes(); - } - /* * Dispatch the GPE to either an installed handler, or the control method * associated with this GPE (_Lxx or _Exx). If a handler exists, we invoke