Return-path: Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:45642 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751901AbYJ0TOP (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:14:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:13:07 +0100 From: Jens Axboe To: Johannes Berg Cc: "Carlos R. Mafra" , Soeren Sonnenburg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tomas.winkler@intel.com, "John W. Linville" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Suspend to RAM regression in 2.6.28-rc2 (bisected) Message-ID: <20081027191307.GI22217@kernel.dk> (sfid-20081027_201429_558043_7E5D9550) References: <20081027162054.GA4015@localhost.aei.mpg.de> <200810271832.40717.rjw@sisk.pl> <1225130844.4466.0.camel@localhost> <1225132278.3796.32.camel@johannes.berg> <1225133082.3796.35.camel@johannes.berg> <20081027190011.GA3951@localhost.aei.mpg.de> <20081027190631.GG22217@kernel.dk> <1225134571.3796.41.camel@johannes.berg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1225134571.3796.41.camel@johannes.berg> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 27 2008, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 20:06 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 27 2008, Carlos R. Mafra wrote: > > > On Mon 27.Oct'08 at 19:44:42 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:31 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 19:07 +0100, Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Johannes, can you pls have a look? > > > > > > > > > > I did, and I have no idea. Makes no sense at all. > > > > > > > > The only thing I can remotely think of is that iwlwifi doesn't like > > > > being called back from within the call that it did to mac80211, which > > > > obviously happens here. But I have no idea, the code as it stands is > > > > correct, just the interaction with iwlwifi's resume seems to be broken. > > > > > > > > Try this patch instead: > > > > > > Yep, with this patch it also works! > > > > Confirmed here as well, my x60 is happy again. > > Thanks. Another alternative I could think of is deferring the > notifications to a work struct, but I'd rather see that in the driver I > think, not sure though, could be argued either way. If you want something else tested, just let me know. I don't care a whole lot about how it gets fixed, as long as it does :-). I use STR heavily, so it's quite a burden to have it broken. -- Jens Axboe