From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261250AbULEEHs (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:07:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261248AbULEEHi (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:07:38 -0500 Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:16333 "EHLO gate.crashing.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261247AbULEEHd (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:07:33 -0500 Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.10-rc3 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: David Brownell Cc: Linux Kernel list In-Reply-To: <200412041903.55583.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <200412041903.55583.david-b@pacbell.net> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 15:07:16 +1100 Message-Id: <1102219637.18809.0.camel@gaston> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Why was that changed? Are you sure it's not just a bug higher up > in the call stack? Classically(*), both suspend() and resume() > methods are called in contexts that can sleep, so that's a big > change I'd expect to impact other drivers too. In fact that'd > explain a lot of other messages I saw reported on the list... Yes, lots of drivers are expected to be able to schedule in suspend and resume requests. If that was broken upstream, then this is a big BUG. > - Dave > > (*) Since APM days if not before. > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- Benjamin Herrenschmidt