Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 10:32:30 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com>
Cc: Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de>, Stefan Seyfried <seife@suse.de>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: e100 oops on resume
Message-ID: <20060126093230.GA2426@elf.ucw.cz>
References: <20060124225919.GC12566@suse.de> <20060124232142.GB6174@inferi.kami.home> <20060125090240.GA12651@suse.de> <20060125121125.GH5465@suse.de> <4807377b0601251137r7621216byc47b03a3c634557c@mail.gmail.com> <4807377b0601251628k4227dad0ld731f2c25c211b91@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4807377b0601251628k4227dad0ld731f2c25c211b91@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1729
Lines: 38

On St 25-01-06 16:28:48, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> On 1/25/06, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/25/06, Olaf Kirch <okir@suse.de> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 10:02:40AM +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote:
> > > > I'm not sure what the right fix would be. e100_resume would probably
> > > > have to call e100_alloc_cbs early on, while e100_up should avoid
> > > > calling it a second time if nic->cbs_avail != 0. A tentative patch
> > > > for testing is attached.
> > >
> > > Reportedly, the patch fixes the crash on resume.
> >
> > Cool, thanks for the research, I have a concern about this however.
> >
> > its an interesting patch, but it raises the question why does
> > e100_init_hw need to be called at all in resume?  I looked back
> > through our history and that init_hw call has always been there.  I
> > think its incorrect, but its taking me a while to set up a system with
> > the ability to resume.
> >
> > everywhere else in the driver alloc_cbs is called before init_hw so it
> > just seems like a long standing bug.
> >
> > comments?  anyone want to test? i compile tested this, but it is untested.
> 
> Okay I reproduced the issue on 2.6.15.1 (with S1 sleep) and was able
> to show that my patch that just removes e100_init_hw works okay for
> me.  Let me know how it goes for you, I think this is a good fix.

S1 preserves hardware state, .suspend/.resume routines can be NULL for
S1. Try with swsusp or S3.
								Pavel
-- 
Thanks, Sharp!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/