From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751773AbXCKIWA (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:22:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751778AbXCKIWA (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:22:00 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:47786 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751773AbXCKIV6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Mar 2007 04:21:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 09:20:02 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Pavel Machek Cc: Stefan Seyfried , Johannes Stezenbach , Linus Torvalds , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Adrian Bunk , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jens Axboe , Jeff Chua , linux-pm@lists.osdl.org, lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, luming.yu@intel.com, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz , Konstantin Karasyov , Greg KH , linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Thomas Meyer , Meelis Roos , Alexey Starikovskiy , Janosch Machowinski , vladimir.p.lebedev@intel.com, Ash Milsted , dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com Subject: Re: [2/6] 2.6.21-rc2: known regressions Message-ID: <20070311082002.GA4013@elte.hu> References: <20070308192554.GA2999@elte.hu> <20070308230705.GA4611@elte.hu> <20070309174821.GA31754@linuxtv.org> <20070309233508.GB2197@elf.ucw.cz> <20070310090121.GB15647@elte.hu> <20070310114301.GA30554@suse.de> <20070310151804.GA10627@elte.hu> <20070310220810.GF2758@elf.ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070310220810.GF2758@elf.ucw.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Pavel Machek wrote: > > Probably tweaking the webpage doesnt help because people dont get > > there - as the results plainly show it. Maybe some more automation > > would be useful too, a tool that detects failed resume and tries all > > those options that makes sense on that box or something? It's not > > like that > > Unfortunately, these tend to crash the box when you pass wrong > options, and I do not see easy way to test "can user see whats on > display" automatically. you could perhaps try what X's modesetting utility does: display a dialog box that times out if it does not get clicked on, and reboot if it did not get clicked on. Likewise, detect upon the next bootup that a suspend-test was in progress (and didnt get back via normal resume), via some temporary file. That way both the 'did not resume and i had to power-cycle' and the 'resume did not restore my X' problems can be handled. Finally, when the correct options have been established (worse-case with a small number of reboots and "yes, indeed the resume did not work fine" clicks done upon bootup by the user), automatically fill in a webform in firefox and ask the user to do a single click to submit that form. techniques like that have more chance i think to get Linux suspend/resume anywhere near to working. The current 'rely on the developer' technique apparently does not work. Ingo