* Rafael J. Wysocki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > ah, ok. Could you try my patch and add touch_softlockup_watchdog() to
> > the resume code (before interrupts are re-enabled)?
>
> I did:
>
> ---
> /home/rafael/tmp/kernel/testing/linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm1/kernel/power/swsusp.c
> 2005-02-05 20:57:03.000000000 +0100
> +++ linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm1/kernel/power/swsusp.c 2005-02-06
> 19:07:39.000000000 +0100
> @@ -871,6 +869,7 @@
> restore_processor_state();
> restore_highmem();
> device_power_up();
> + touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> local_irq_enable();
> return error;
> }
>
> and it still complains, but the call trace is now different:
could you describe the timings a bit more - how long it takes to do the
resume, and when does the watchdog print out its warning. Is it a single
warning only, and once the resume succeeds, the watchdog doesnt complain
anymore, correct?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
