From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-rc4-git] PM: boot time suspend selftest Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 16:06:32 -0700 Message-ID: <20080529160632.816e1720.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <200805291333.42057.david-b@pacbell.net> <200805292301.42244.rjw@sisk.pl> <200805291426.18404.david-b@pacbell.net> <200805292329.48896.rjw@sisk.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200805292329.48896.rjw@sisk.pl> 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: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pavel@suse.cz List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 29 May 2008 23:29:48 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" wrote: > On Thursday, 29 of May 2008, David Brownell wrote: > > On Thursday 29 May 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > Two questions: > > > > > > 1) How is it related to the analogous patch in the Ingo's tree? > > > > AFAIK -- just that it's an updated version. Comments, some > > code flow, but mostly having the "test_suspend=mode" parameter > > default to "safe -- no testing" and allows the choice of modes. > > > > > > > 2) Does it apply to the current linux-next? > > > > No idea. > > Could you check, please? The previous version didn't. > There's just one trivial reject against the PCI tree's pm-introduce-new-top-level-suspend-and-hibernation-callbacks: *************** *** 293,299 **** if (suspend_ops->finish) suspend_ops->finish(); Resume_devices: device_resume(); Resume_console: resume_console(); Close: --- 342,350 ---- if (suspend_ops->finish) suspend_ops->finish(); Resume_devices: + suspend_test_start(); device_resume(); + suspend_test_finish("resume devices"); Resume_console: resume_console(); Close: