From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AB2BC433FE for ; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 11:27:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244328AbiDAL24 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2022 07:28:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40728 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233187AbiDAL2u (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Apr 2022 07:28:50 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCD5727547C; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 04:26:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id A682E67373; Fri, 1 Apr 2022 13:26:49 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 13:26:49 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Thorsten Leemhuis Cc: Mario Limonciello , Jian-Hong Pan , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, "Rafael J . Wysocki" , ACPI Devel Maling List Subject: Re: Bug 215742 - The NVME storage quirked as SIMPLE SUSPEND makes system resume failed after suspend (Regression) Message-ID: <20220401112649.GA14810@lst.de> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 09:55:14AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi, this is your Linux kernel regression tracker. > > I noticed a regression report in bugzilla.kernel.org that afaics nobody > acted upon since it was reported about a week ago, that's why I decided > to forward it to the lists and all people that seemed to be relevant > here. Mario, could you maybe take a look at this? Or is that something > for the NVM or ACPI people? Or was this discussed somewhere else > already? Or even fixed? I've not seenthe report. Looks like the BIOS sets the StorageD3 flag in the ACPI tables in this system but doesn't actually want it, which is really strange. We could add some kind of quirk based on DMI matching, but this all seems weird.