Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757124AbYGYWWR (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:22:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751935AbYGYWWG (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:22:06 -0400 Received: from smtp115.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.88]:42168 "HELO smtp115.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751778AbYGYWWF (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:22:05 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=iaZQz2Hd1ZFiNBNiMUlBch2S25NRZQxT/WmJu5aybTgeD2XQJ254zfo50hsXLWcPRBvQTPNbt8Nd8pcR+sIWp6dabGa83s5awI85oinJJ3+GZHePWBCG7nM3JXduT3FcmEAFcYDxHQQHbwMt/c3UqwBvHKcVWSr8o+81SDCa27Y= ; X-YMail-OSG: ga5XZTAVM1kLHAkJuZg7eST5sbvGG7ywiWd3F4wl4K.t4kQgjo2rIRUaRQ04dQODWEZNIZAuk6kw1.qCApernoM38Suulm_8Gnc6L7hrpWW8wqRNPU6theZKiUgi3Ej5ubQ- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.26-git] pm selftest: rtc paranoia Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:22:02 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.9 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org References: <200807251326.51987.david-b@pacbell.net> <20080725144946.5e1b78c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080725144946.5e1b78c8.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200807251522.02789.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1057 Lines: 35 On Friday 25 July 2008, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:26:51 -0700 > David Brownell wrote: > > > From: David Brownell > > > > Cope with a quirk of some RTCs (notably ACPI ones) which > > aren't guaranteed to implement oneshot behavior when they > > woke the system from sleeep: forcibly disable the alarm, > > just in case. > > > > ... > > I assume this fixes some reported bug? Any references? It's more paranoia than anything else ... I saw a version of this with on x86, but that was because of problems in the HPET glue (fixed by a previous patch). > Is this needed in 2.6.26.x? 2.6.25.x? The selftest only merged this week, so not 2.6.25; and since it's just paranoia, it shouldn't be critical for 2.6.26 either. - Dave -- 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/