From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: 3.10.1 cpufreq suspend/resume regression still present in 3.10.2 Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 20:52:21 +0530 Message-ID: <51ED4E2D.5020908@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20130722151653.GA7213@sacarino.pirispons.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130722151653.GA7213@sacarino.pirispons.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Kiko Piris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Viresh Kumar , Linux PM mailing list List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 07/22/2013 08:46 PM, Kiko Piris wrote: > Hi, >=20 > linux-3.10.1 introduced a regression in cpufreq breaking suspend/resu= me > cycle for some people [1]. >=20 > There were also some other threads about it in lkml. >=20 > I see 3.10.2-stable was released some days ago. I couldn=E2=80=99t se= e anything > about fixing this regression reported in the changelog. >=20 > And to be 110% certain, I compiled it and tried suspending/resuming; > it=E2=80=99s still broken. >=20 > Is this going to be fixed in 3.10 stable branch? >=20 The patches that fix that regression went into mainline just a few days ago as these commits:=20 commit aae760ed21cd690fe8a6db9f3a177ad55d7e12ab Author: Srivatsa S. Bhat Date: Fri Jul 12 03:45:37 2013 +0530 cpufreq: Revert commit a66b2e to fix suspend/resume regression commit e8d05276f236ee6435e78411f62be9714e0b9377 Author: Srivatsa S. Bhat Date: Tue Jul 16 22:46:48 2013 +0200 cpufreq: Revert commit 2f7021a8 to fix CPU hotplug regression And both of them have been CC'ed to -stable. So they should be hitting the stable tree soon. Hmm, that reminds me.. whenever a patch cc'ed to stable hit the mainlin= e, the patch signers used to receive an automatic email from Greg. I didn'= t get that for the above two patches.. Did the process change due to the recent discussions around -stable tree maintenance? Regards, Srivatsa S. Bhat