Re: 3.10.1 cpufreq suspend/resume regression still present in 3.10.2

[Paul Bolle]

On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 17:16 +0200, Kiko Piris wrote:
> linux-3.10.1 introduced a regression in cpufreq breaking suspend/resume
> cycle for some people [1].

The upstream commit that probably will fix the regression that Kiko ran
into is aae760ed21cd690fe8a6db9f3a177ad55d7e12ab ("cpufreq: Revert
commit a66b2e to fix suspend/resume regression"). It's only part of
v3.11-rc2 and was committed with a
    Cc: 3.10+ <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

tag. So I'd guess that fix will be part of a future v3.10.y (stable)
releases.

> There were also some other threads about it in lkml.
> 
> I see 3.10.2-stable was released some days ago. I couldnât see anything
> about fixing this regression reported in the changelog.
> 
> And to be 110% certain, I compiled it and tried suspending/resuming;
> itâs still broken.
> 
> Is this going to be fixed in 3.10 stable branch?
> 
> Thank you very much in advance.

Note that I already suggested to Kiko to try that patch (see
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/7/14/35 ). I don't know whether Kiko tried
it, as I never received a reply to my suggestion. So, for now, I can
only say that that patch will probably fix the issue.

> [1] first commit that bisect informed as introducing the regression:
> 
> | commit c02527487f0c8feb578c0394ad481a97f26d3bd2
> | Author: Srivatsa S. Bhat <srivatsa.bhat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> | Date:   Mon Jul 1 00:40:55 2013 +0200
> |
> |     cpufreq: Fix cpufreq regression after suspend/resume
> |
> |     commit f51e1eb63d9c28cec188337ee656a13be6980cfd upstream.
> 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/linux.kernel/LUi1pFCxbSI


Paul Bolle

--
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/