Re: 2.6.13-rc4: yenta_socket and swsusp

[Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>]

Andreas Steinmetz <ast@domdv.de> wrote:
>
> [now sending to lkml as sending to the pcmcia list without being
> subscribed seems to go to /dev/null]

Seems that the linux-kernel list has the same result ;(

> I do have problems with yenta_socket on my x86_64 laptop which appear
> when using swsusp (suspend to disk mode).
> 
> 1. When I do not access any pcmcia device from initrd during boot
>    I have to terminate cardmgr, otherwise suspend to disk hangs.
>    For 2.6.11 it was sufficient to call 'cardctl eject'.
> 
> 2. When I have to access a pcmcia device from initrd during boot
>    (there's required crypto keys stored on a pcmcia flash disk)
>    and I do not unload yenta_socket prior to suspend the laptop
>    spontaneously reboots or just hangs on resume when swsusp has
>    finished loading.
> 
> 3. If I do not unload the pcmcia modules prior to suspend with
>    rmmod -w unloading yenta_socket fails.
> 
> 4. If I do unload the pcmcia modules in a loop with rmmod -w
>    but no delay between unloading the modules it happens from
>    time to time that yenta_socket unloading hangs with a use
>    count of 2 when there is definitely no more user of the module.
>    A delay of 50 msec after unload of each pcmcia module seems
>    to cure this.
> 
> 5. If I insert yenta_socket within the first few seconds after resume
>    the laptop spontaneously reboots. A 5 second delay seems to cure
>    this most of the time.

OK so we have one solid regression there.  Are the other problems also new
since 2.6.11?

Could you please retest 2.6.13-rc6 when it's out and if problems remain,
raise a bugzilla.kernel.org entry so we can keep track of the problem? 
Thanks.

(I'm trying to get all unattended and older-than-a-few-days bug reports
pushed over to bugzilla so they don't get lost).

> BTW:
> Did I read this right? PCMCIA control ioctl (needed for pcmcia-cs
> [cardmgr, cardctl]) scheduled for removal in november *this* year? So a
> 3 month warning for everybody is sufficient? Probably only one kernel
> release? So much for sufficient backwards compatability. Especially as
> the tools stated to be required aren't even released as of today (hint:
> module-init-tools 3.2). Grrr.

Three months does sound optimistic.  Dominik, wouldn't a year be better?