From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753107Ab1AQOEs (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:04:48 -0500 Received: from vwp2514.webpack.hosteurope.de ([87.230.42.24]:36660 "EHLO vwp2514.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751210Ab1AQOEr (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:04:47 -0500 Subject: Re: resume regression in 2.6.37 From: Sven Neumann To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Daniel Mack , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org In-Reply-To: References: <1294933492.2535.23.camel@sven> <1294938961.10740.24.camel@sven> <1295260580.2060.29.camel@sven> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: RAUMFELD GmbH Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 15:04:43 +0100 Message-ID: <1295273083.2060.34.camel@sven> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;s.neumann@raumfeld.com;1295273087;46c1e9a9; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 13:40 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Sven Neumann wrote: > > > On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 18:33 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > > Without the revert there is absolutely no sign of resume. With the > > > > change reverted I can see that the PXA powers up again, there's an LED > > > > showing that the USB controller has power again. Unfortunately there's > > > > seems to be another problem and the resume doesn't complete. I've tried > > > > to get console output by using no_console_suspend, but there's just > > > > gibberish on the console after resume :( > > > > > > > > Any idea on how to proceed from here? I could perhaps ask our hardware > > > > engineer to try find out where exactly we are stuck in the resume. But > > > > I'd like to avoid that if possible. > > > > > > Can you stick a printk into the set_wake() function of that irq chip > > > and print the irq and on arguments and the return value . Run that > > > with both stock 2.6.37 and the patch reverted. > > > > pxa3xx_set_wake(31, 1) returns 0 > > > > Same result with stock 2.6.37 and the patch reverted. Except that > > without the patch reverted, the device doesn't power up again. > > Ok, can we agree that the patch has no functional impact on the > set_wake function? And I don't see a reason why reverting that patch > results in a working resume. That does not make sense at all. Which > compiler version are you using ? I agree that this is all very weird and as far as I understand the patch it should have no functional impact. Unfortunately reverting the patch does not result in a working resume, but at least it makes a difference and at the moment it's the only trace I have. My cross-compile tool-chain uses GCC 4.3.5. Sven