Re: [BUG] Code reordering in swsusp breaks suspend on SMP systems

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Sunday, 25 March 2007 17:10, Maxim wrote:
> On Sunday 25 March 2007 14:13:07 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Sunday, 25 March 2007 01:40, Maxim wrote:
> > > On Friday 23 March 2007 16:42:44 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Friday, 23 March 2007 00:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, 22 March 2007 00:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, 22 March 2007 00:39, Maxim wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thursday 22 March 2007 01:24:25 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thursday, 22 March 2007 00:09, Maxim wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Thursday 22 March 2007 00:39:02 you wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, 21 March 2007 23:21, Pavel Machek wrote: 
> > > Hi,
> > > 	I confirm that the above patch works,
> > > 
> > > 	At least system didn't hang on resume with microcode driver loaded,
> > > 
> > > 	I can't really test whenever it did update microcode because I almost sure there is nothing to update
> > > 	(I use core 2 duo that I bought a month ago, and an intel motherboard with latest bios ( updated yesterday) )
> > > 	I selected this driver just in case when I compiled kernel.
> > 
> > OK, thanks for testing.
> > 
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 	I tested this patch, and it does work too,
> 	System suspended /resumed correctly, no errors in kernel log

Thanks for the confirmation.

I wonder if someone who actually needs the microcode to be updated can test
it ...

> > -	first_cpu = first_cpu(cpu_present_map);
> > -	if (!cpu_online(first_cpu)) {
> > -		error = _cpu_up(first_cpu);
> > -		if (error) {
> > -			printk(KERN_ERR "Could not bring CPU%d up.\n",
> > -				first_cpu);
> > -			goto out;
> > -		}
> > -	}
> > -
> 
> Nice, I once have seen those lines too, and they look ridiculous, but
> could that be that they are still necessary on some systems, 

I think this was a mistake from the beginning.

Rafael