From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030374AbVIAVKZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 17:10:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030377AbVIAVKZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 17:10:25 -0400 Received: from [203.171.93.254] ([203.171.93.254]:31375 "EHLO cunningham.myip.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030374AbVIAVKZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Sep 2005 17:10:25 -0400 Subject: Re: reboot vs poweroff (was: Linux 2.6.13) From: Nigel Cunningham Reply-To: ncunningham@cyclades.com To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Pierre Ossman , Pavel Machek , Meelis Roos , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Len Brown In-Reply-To: References: <20050901062406.EBA5613D5B@rhn.tartu-labor> <1125557333.12996.76.camel@localhost> <4316F4E3.4030302@drzeus.cx> <1125578897.4785.23.camel@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Cyclades Message-Id: <1125608946.4785.27.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6-1mdk Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 07:09:06 +1000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. On Fri, 2005-09-02 at 01:15, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Nigel Cunningham writes: > > > On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 22:32, Pierre Ossman wrote: > >> Meelis Roos wrote: > >> > > >> > It's OK then - I'm not using any suspend and I had a problem that my > >> > machine powered down instead of reboot. The patch that went into 2.6.13 > >> > after rc7 fixed it for me. So the current tree is OK for me and if it's > >> > OK for you too after suspend2 changes then this case can probably be > >> > closed. > >> > > >> > >> I'm still having problems with this patch. Both swsusp and swsusp2 are > >> affected. Perhaps the fix Nigel did needs to be done to swsusp aswell? > > > > Yes, it does need modifying. I'll leave it to Pavel to do that though as > > he's more familiar with the intricacies of that code than I am. > > Are suspend and suspend2 not calling kernel_power_off()? They are/weren't calling pm_ops->prepare if we're using poweroff or reboot rather than entering S3 or S4. > I am not certain about that code path but I worked hard in the lead > up to 2.6.13 to get everyone on the same page so we did not have > strange reboot issues on one code path and not on another. > > It is possible that the code path in suspend is so strange I did not > recognize it. How do you initiate a S4 power off? > > I can understand suspend2 having problems as it isn't merged but suspend > is merged isn't it? You're fine. It's just that we were both working around the problem before, and don't need to now. Regards, Nigel > Hmm. Looking at that bug report it specifies 2.6.11. Does this > problem really happen in 2.6.13? > > Eric -- Evolution. Enumerate the requirements. Consider the interdependencies. Calculate the probabilities.