from:"Yu"

[Bug 2080454] Re: NIC(r8169) didn't link up after resuming from suspend

2024-09-23 Thread Atlas Yu

I found on this
machine(https://certification.canonical.com/hardware/202304-31462/)
which uses the same card RTL8168fp/RTL8117 (XID 54b, DASH: disabled), I
suppose this is a single hardware issue, but not 100% sure.

I also tested against several ThinkStation/ThinkCentre machines with
RTL8168fp/RTL8117 (XID 54a, DASH: disabled), they all works fine.

Test output for 202304-31462:

Results generated by fwts: Version V24.07.00 (2024-07-30 03:13:27).

Some of this work - Copyright (c) 1999 - 2023, Intel Corp. All rights reserved.
Some of this work - Copyright (c) 2010 - 2023, Canonical.
Some of this work - Copyright (c) 2016 - 2023, IBM.
Some of this work - Copyright (c) 2017 - 2023, ARM Ltd.

This test run on 23/09/24 at 17:38:41 on host Linux ubuntu 6.8.0-44-generic
#44~22.04.1-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu Aug 22 15:00:55 UTC 2 x86_64.

Command: "fwts --s3-multiple=5 s3".
Running tests: s3.

s3: Sleep suspend/resume test.

Test 1 of 1: Sleep suspend/resume test.
s2idle cycle 1 of 5 
Detecting the power method.
Response to CanSuspend is yes 
User allowed to execute the CanSuspend action 
Using logind as the default power method.
Requesting Suspend action 
Skipping the minimum delay (0) and using a 3 seconds delay instead 
s2idle duration = 32.
wakeup source name: "00:00" wakeup event was signaled.
pm-action returned 0 after 32 seconds.
Spent 84.32% of 32s in hardware sleep state
Suspend/Resume Timings:
  Suspend: 0.729 seconds.
  Resume:  1.430 seconds.
s2idle cycle 2 of 5 
Using logind as the default power method.
Requesting Suspend action 
Skipping the minimum delay (0) and using a 3 seconds delay instead 
s2idle duration = 32.
wakeup source name: "00:00" wakeup event was signaled.
pm-action returned 0 after 32 seconds.
Spent 87.83% of 32s in hardware sleep state
Suspend/Resume Timings:
  Suspend: 0.660 seconds.
  Resume:  1.423 seconds.
s2idle cycle 3 of 5 
Using logind as the default power method.
Requesting Suspend action 
Skipping the minimum delay (0) and using a 3 seconds delay instead 
s2idle duration = 31.
wakeup source name: "00:00" wakeup event was signaled.
pm-action returned 0 after 31 seconds.
Spent 89.12% of 31s in hardware sleep state
Suspend/Resume Timings:
  Suspend: 0.667 seconds.
  Resume:  1.422 seconds.
s2idle cycle 4 of 5 
Using logind as the default power method.
Requesting Suspend action 
Skipping the minimum delay (0) and using a 3 seconds delay instead 
s2idle duration = 32.
wakeup source name: "00:00" wakeup event was signaled.
pm-action returned 0 after 32 seconds.
Spent 87.73% of 32s in hardware sleep state
Suspend/Resume Timings:
  Suspend: 0.721 seconds.
  Resume:  1.424 seconds.
s2idle cycle 5 of 5 
Using logind as the default power method.
Requesting Suspend action 
Skipping the minimum delay (0) and using a 3 seconds delay instead 
s2idle duration = 31.
wakeup source name: "00:00" wakeup event was signaled.
pm-action returned 0 after 31 seconds.
Spent 88.96% of 31s in hardware sleep state
Suspend/Resume Timings:
  Suspend: 0.713 seconds.
  Resume:  1.415 seconds.
Completed s2idle cycle(s) 
PASSED: Test 1, No kernel log errors detected.
PASSED: Test 1, No PM related suspend issues detected.
PASSED: Test 1, No device errors detected.
PASSED: Test 1, No kernel oopses detected.
PASSED: Test 1, No kernel WARN_ON warnings detected.
PASSED: Test 1, No s2idle errors detected.
PASSED: Test 1, Found no errors doing 5 suspend/resume cycle(s).
PASSED: Test 1, All suspends took less than 15.00 seconds.
PASSED: Test 1, All resumes took less than 15.00 seconds.


9 passed, 0 failed, 0 warning, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only.



9 passed, 0 failed, 0 warning, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only.

Test Failure Summary


Critical failures: NONE

High failures: NONE

Medium failures: NONE

Low failures: NONE

Other failures: NONE

Test   |Pass |Fail |Abort|Warn |Skip |Info |
---+-+-+-+-+-+-+
s3 |9| | | | | |
---+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Total: |9|0|0|0|0|0|
---+-+-+-+-+-+-+

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2080454

Title:
  NIC(r8169) didn't link up after resuming from suspend

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-signed-hwe-6.8/+bug/2080454/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2081124] Re: systemd service dependency loop between cloud-init, NetworkManager and dbus

2024-09-19 Thread Bill Yu

** Tags added: jira-stella-191

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2081124

Title:
  systemd service dependency loop between cloud-init, NetworkManager and
  dbus

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/2081124/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2060268] Re: Phantom "Unknown Display" shown in Settings after installing the Nvidia driver

2024-08-30 Thread Bill Yu

@Daniel @Alessandro
Sorry for the pushing. Is that possible to clarify SRU team's concern on #74?
There are HP's commercial demands. Please see the impacted platform and bugs 
listed below.

HP Z4 G5 cert with 24.04: https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/STELLA-58
HP Elite SFF 805 G9 with 22.04: https://bugs.launchpad.net/stella/+bug/2071758

If this fix can be reviewed OK and moved to proposed first by Sep-03,
that would be very helpful for the HP projects. Thank you.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2060268

Title:
  Phantom "Unknown Display" shown in Settings after installing the
  Nvidia driver

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/2060268/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2067240] Re: [SRU] Add Quectel EM061K-GL/EM160/RM520N PID information to support WWAN LVFS

2024-08-23 Thread Atlas Yu

Hi Andreas,

The package on jammy-proposed(1.20.0-1~ubuntu22.04.4) fixes the bug for
me.

u@Thames-1:~$ dpkg -l | grep modemmanager
ii  gir1.2-modemmanager-1.0:amd64  1.20.0-1~ubuntu22.04.4   
 amd64GObject introspection data for modemmanager
ii  modemmanager   1.20.0-1~ubuntu22.04.4   
 amd64D-Bus service for managing modems
ii  modemmanager-dev:amd64 1.20.0-1~ubuntu22.04.4   
 amd64D-Bus service for managing modems - development files
ii  modemmanager-doc   1.20.0-1~ubuntu22.04.4   
 all  D-Bus service for managing modems - documentation files
u@Thames-1:~$ mmcli -L
/org/freedesktop/ModemManager1/Modem/0 [quectel] RM520N-GL

** Tags removed: verification-needed-jammy
** Tags added: verification-done-jammy

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2067240

Title:
  [SRU] Add Quectel EM061K-GL/EM160/RM520N PID information to support
  WWAN LVFS

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/oem-priority/+bug/2067240/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

[Bug 2064977] Re: new gnome-terminal instances launched from nautilus fail to receive automatic focus

2024-08-17 Thread Yu Yang Lin Hou

Same issue. If you "Open in Terminal" without typing anything, the new
terminal always gains focus. But the moment you type anything on one of
the terminals, subsequent terminals do not gain focus. Instead, you get
a notification at the top saying the terminal "is ready".

In fact, this issue has been around for ages now. Here's one ignored from
23.04, which documents it being around since 22.10 at least:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nautilus/+bug/2016182

It could be an issue with gnome, however Nemo does not exhibit this behaviour
and always opens the terminal in focus, so I suspect it's an issue with
Nautilus. One perhaps overkill method is to completely disable Gnome opening
stuff in background with `gnome-shell-extension-no-annoyance`
(https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1236/noannoyance/), however 24.04
appears to not be able to enable gnome shell extensions:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/1522939/not-possible-to-enable-gnome-shell-extensions-in-ubuntu-24-04

A workaround I used since 21.04 is to run a devilspie2 script that grabs focus
of the terminal whenever one is opened.
```
if ( get_application_name() == 'Terminal' and get_window_name() == 'Terminal' )
then
focus_window();
end
```
Don't blindly use it tho. Every terminal opened will have focus. It didn't
matter to me, but it may affect you in unexpected ways. It's also unnecessary
as you are adding automation for something that you can stop using. Most people
would just switch to Nemo. Of the alternatives I've tested, the ones that
didn't work on 24.04 were:
- Dolphin: open in terminal does nothing
- Thunar: returns `failed to launch preferred application for category
TerminalEmulator`
- PCManFM: opens in background, just like Nautilus

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

1 - 100 of 1714 matches

Mail list logo