Re: acpi-test tree on eeepc: EC error message on second resume
From: Alan Jenkins
Date: Mon Oct 13 2008 - 12:39:51 EST
Alan Jenkins wrote:
> Alexis Starikovskiy wrote:
>
>> Alan Jenkins wrote:
>>
>>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, 11 of October 2008, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, we discussed this before -- we are outside of the
>>>>>>> transaction, thus no GPE
>>>>>>> activity could interfere with ec_check_ibf0.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ok, this is in the process context and we don't really expect to
>>>>>> get an
>>>>>> interrupt at this point, but what happens if the EC generates an
>>>>>> event that's
>>>>>> not related to any transiaction. Is that guaranteed to never happen?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Interrupt handler in this case can't cause a change to status
>>>>> register, thus our read of it will not be affected by interrupt.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ok, thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Alan, does the patch work for you?
>>>>
>>>> Rafael
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Yes. Two reboot cycles, three suspend/resume cycles each, and no error
>>> message.
>>>
>>> I hope we have a better fix in mind though :-P. The patch doesn't solve
>>> the unnecessary 500ms delay when this thing happens.
>>>
>> Something like this?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Alex.
>>
>
> You sent it as an attachment again :-).
>
> That should work, odd as it looks. We don't need to worry about the GPE
> workaround because that's only active _inside_ the transaction. I don't
> know what Zhao thinks is missing.
>
> Sorry I can't test right now. I tried to install 3D support on my
> laptop for showing-off purposes, and somehow broke X.
>
Drama over, I've now tested it. No error messages, and the printk
timings show that it has stopped hanging for half a second.
Thanks
Alan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/