[2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[Shawn Starr]

When resuming from suspend, I noticed the clock is waay off (its 10:16pm, it 
shows 2:34AM EST time). This is even after a reboot the bios now shows wrong 
time?

Anyone else notice this recently?

Shawn.

Re: [2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> When resuming from suspend, I noticed the clock is waay off (its 10:16pm, it 
> shows 2:34AM EST time). This is even after a reboot the bios now shows wrong 
> time?

Yes, see for example thread "2.6.10-mm2: swsusp regression
[update]". Nigel has some patch that should fix it...

									Pavel

-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: [2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wednesday, 12 of January 2005 23:24, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > When resuming from suspend, I noticed the clock is waay off (its 10:16pm, 
it 
> > shows 2:34AM EST time). This is even after a reboot the bios now shows 
wrong 
> > time?
> 
> Yes, see for example thread "2.6.10-mm2: swsusp regression
> [update]". Nigel has some patch that should fix it...

Do you mean patches in the "[RFC] Patches to reduce delay in 
arch/kernel/time.c" thread?

RJW

-- 
- Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?
- That depends a good deal on where you want to get to.
		-- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"

Re: [2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> > > When resuming from suspend, I noticed the clock is waay off (its 10:16pm, 
> it 
> > > shows 2:34AM EST time). This is even after a reboot the bios now shows 
> wrong 
> > > time?
> > 
> > Yes, see for example thread "2.6.10-mm2: swsusp regression
> > [update]". Nigel has some patch that should fix it...
> 
> Do you mean patches in the "[RFC] Patches to reduce delay in 
> arch/kernel/time.c" thread?

I meant this one... (cut&pasted, apply by hand). But it seems to be
included in 2.6.11-rc1. I'm now confused.
								Pavel

diff -ruNp 910-original-time-patch-old/arch/i386/kernel/time.c
910-original-time-patch-new/arch/i386/kernel/time.c
--- 910-original-time-patch-old/arch/i386/kernel/time.c 2004-12-27
+++ 910-original-time-patch-new/arch/i386/kernel/time.c 2005-01-08
@@ -343,12 +343,13 @@ static int timer_resume(struct sys_devic
                hpet_reenable();
 #endif
        sec = get_cmos_time() + clock_cmos_diff;
-       sleep_length = get_cmos_time() - sleep_start;
+       sleep_length = (get_cmos_time() - sleep_start) * HZ;
        write_seqlock_irqsave(&xtime_lock, flags);
        xtime.tv_sec = sec;
        xtime.tv_nsec = 0;
        write_sequnlock_irqrestore(&xtime_lock, flags);
-       jiffies += sleep_length * HZ;
+       jiffies += sleep_length;
+       wall_jiffies += sleep_length;
        return 0;
 }


-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: [2.6.10][Suspend] - Time problems

[Shawn Starr]

I'll just bump to 2.6.11-rc1, Rafael, not that one

In either case, it won't be a problem in a few moments. :)

Shawn.

On January 12, 2005 17:50, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > > When resuming from suspend, I noticed the clock is waay off (its
> > > > 10:16pm,
> >
> > it
> >
> > > > shows 2:34AM EST time). This is even after a reboot the bios now
> > > > shows
> >
> > wrong
> >
> > > > time?
> > >
> > > Yes, see for example thread "2.6.10-mm2: swsusp regression
> > > [update]". Nigel has some patch that should fix it...
> >
> > Do you mean patches in the "[RFC] Patches to reduce delay in
> > arch/kernel/time.c" thread?
>
> I meant this one... (cut&pasted, apply by hand). But it seems to be
> included in 2.6.11-rc1. I'm now confused.
>         Pavel
>
> diff -ruNp 910-original-time-patch-old/arch/i386/kernel/time.c
> 910-original-time-patch-new/arch/i386/kernel/time.c
> --- 910-original-time-patch-old/arch/i386/kernel/time.c 2004-12-27
> +++ 910-original-time-patch-new/arch/i386/kernel/time.c 2005-01-08
> @@ -343,12 +343,13 @@ static int timer_resume(struct sys_devic
>                 hpet_reenable();
>  #endif
>         sec = get_cmos_time() + clock_cmos_diff;
> -       sleep_length = get_cmos_time() - sleep_start;
> +       sleep_length = (get_cmos_time() - sleep_start) * HZ;
>         write_seqlock_irqsave(&xtime_lock, flags);
>         xtime.tv_sec = sec;
>         xtime.tv_nsec = 0;
>         write_sequnlock_irqrestore(&xtime_lock, flags);
> -       jiffies += sleep_length * HZ;
> +       jiffies += sleep_length;
> +       wall_jiffies += sleep_length;
>         return 0;
>  }

[2.6.12-rc1] suspend to Disk success - T42 laptop

[Shawn Starr]

Hello Pavel, I can now suspend to disk on the laptop with 2.6.12-rc1. There is 
no failures anymore. It resumes perfectly.

Thank you.

Shawn.

Re: [2.6.12-rc1] suspend to Disk success - T42 laptop

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> Hello Pavel, I can now suspend to disk on the laptop with 2.6.12-rc1. There is 
> no failures anymore. It resumes perfectly.

No video hacks needed? Good.
									Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!

Re: [2.6.12-rc1] suspend to Disk success - T42 laptop

[Stefan Seyfried]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>> Hello Pavel, I can now suspend to disk on the laptop with 2.6.12-rc1. There is 
>> no failures anymore. It resumes perfectly.
> 
> No video hacks needed? Good.

suspend to disk. !(suspend to RAM).

:-)

Stefan