From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760257Ab2D0Odl (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:33:41 -0400 Received: from ironport-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.143.162]:62355 "EHLO ironport-out.teksavvy.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759256Ab2D0Odk (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:33:40 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AuEBACxOgk8Y9geI/2dsb2JhbAANNoVzsCSGLAEBAQEDI1UBEAsYAgIFFgsCAgkDAgECAUUGDQEHAQG0JIoYgS+OE4EYBKklgTgW X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,391,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="177115465" Message-ID: <4F9AAE43.5080809@teksavvy.com> Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 10:33:39 -0400 From: Mark Lord User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Stultz CC: richard -rw- weinberger , Linux Kernel , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, Alessandro Zummo , Greg Kroah-Hartman , stable@vger.kernel.org, Rabin Vincent Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] rtc/interface.c: kills suspend-to-ram References: <4F8BA1C1.4030804@teksavvy.com> <4F8C24E5.4020703@teksavvy.com> <4F8C3DDF.8030103@teksavvy.com> <4F8C415C.80806@teksavvy.com> <4F8C76EB.20709@linaro.org> <4F8C926D.2040503@linaro.org> <4F8CD5D3.8060006@teksavvy.com> <4F8CFC12.6050700@linaro.org> <4F8DCE74.2020906@teksavvy.com> <4F8DF673.8050605@linaro.org> <4F8E18FA.7040602@teksavvy.com> <4F8F0811.5060407@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <4F8F0811.5060407@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12-04-18 02:29 PM, John Stultz wrote: > On 04/17/2012 06:29 PM, Mark Lord wrote: >> I'll give the suggestions above a go when I get the system back. >> Right now it's out on loan for application testing. >> >> And there is a simple workaround for that system, which I'm now using: >> just disable the RTC Alarm in the BIOS and the issue goes away. >> And as you point out, hwclock does seem to be diddling with the Alarm >> for some reason, so I'm feeling this isn't so important any more. >> >> But as we've gone this far, I will instrument things as requested >> when I get the system back in a few days. > Once again, thanks so much for reporting the issue and help with testing! I know going through > remote diagnostics is a pain, especially when you have a workaround. :) Anyway, your help here is > very much appreciated. Mmm.. at this point I may not get that system back here again. The fellow who has it wants to hang onto it. So.. nothing. :)