From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 28 01:38:48 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10D14106564A; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:38:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (r2b9.nsu.ru [212.192.164.39]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F96C8FC12; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:38:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S2Bkq-0004D4-Vz; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:21:25 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q1S1QlV0026879; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:26:47 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id q1S1QDe3026850; Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:26:14 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 08:26:13 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Jung-uk Kim Message-ID: <20120228012613.GA24712@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20120227152238.GA2940@regency.nsu.ru> <134870242.175249.1330357669745.JavaMail.root@erie.cs.uoguelph.ca> <20120227164733.GA12679@regency.nsu.ru> <201202271246.09674.jkim@FreeBSD.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201202271246.09674.jkim@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Resume broken in 8.3-PRERELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 01:38:48 -0000 On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:46:07PM -0500, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > Can you please try head and/or stable/9? FYI, Linux people found that > some BIOSes can corrupt low 64KB between suspend/resume, which may > cause strangeness like this. I worked around it in head (r231781) > and stable/9 (r232088). Frankly speaking, last time I tried next stable to my running branch (not to mention head) I've gained more problems than solutions. :-) For example, when this laptop of mine was running stable/7 suspend/resume was working for months. I only (reluctantly) switched to stable/8 as I've noticed it's getting more attention that 7.x series, and annoying people with "please MFC it to 7.x!" calls does not look particularly nice. I remember that commit of your, though. I will try to backport at and report of the results, thanks! ./danfe