Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2015 23:07:04 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> To: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> Cc: Joseph Mingrone <jrm@ftfl.ca>, "Brandon J. Wandersee" <brandon.wandersee@gmail.com>, FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: suspend/resume regression Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmon1%2BEDVUnYseXoBRun8uJ=6GwipJP=Jv0egCXWxXvmkJw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1txeEC6YuLEC9oR4Gt3PBD6e70BPcV3nQyY2RrCg5hgaA@mail.gmail.com> References: <86oak289hv.fsf@gly.ftfl.ca> <CAJ-Vmo=onHpgQzxqk1_AsBNXvDNGqcMjBDf8DCff7Zt39Pipqg@mail.gmail.com> <86616894vk.fsf@gly.ftfl.ca> <CAN6yY1tuv6XO05HPXTVdoQGHFz-0Bod0Lvj4h5PRqEyyVy61Xg@mail.gmail.com> <86oak0bkky.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <CAN6yY1ud1-0MXnZXSo74oVxOhMU4%2Bc3KY9-6LmGXQ2Aq6-q6TQ@mail.gmail.com> <867fqo6sbh.fsf@gly.ftfl.ca> <CAN6yY1sGmjv6NtKQWHRkngVJMew0exy2D_VaqvDYSr80TwxPMA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1sPPkCGen7ZGzSQZNGc7NrzXPRuKi4sQNyUZbwQpkrfZA@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1sF4f8CtnGO8TzwNDDD432bOaHS-gY5_f3eaY5nGMs9Ow@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmokMH%2BWoi9HmuK_U003XWWvUS0qCZwUO7euNvLz7v4ei-w@mail.gmail.com> <86zj3j68e7.fsf@gly.ftfl.ca> <CAN6yY1smQ5uhert2BngMFtZCdrMdcOM6tXW7oYQTZvu1S4saJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAN6yY1txeEC6YuLEC9oR4Gt3PBD6e70BPcV3nQyY2RrCg5hgaA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ok, so which subset of changes is the culprit? (sorry, I'm tired.. :( ) -a On 28 June 2015 at 22:45, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Jun 28, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Joseph Mingrone <jrm@ftfl.ca> wrote: >>> >>> Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> writes: >>> > ok. I've updated my x230 to the latest -head and it is okay at >>> > suspend/resume. >>> >>> No problem with -head on the X220 as well. >>> >>> > I can go acquire an x220 (now that they're cheap) to have as another >>> > reference laptop. >>> >>> You might ping Allan Jude. If I'm not mistaken he had at least two >>> X220s at BSDCan. Maybe he'd be willing to part with one. >> >> >> I have now merged all of the parts of 284034 except for 281874 and resume >> works correctly. As i suspected, something in that rather large commit is >> the problem and it is probably something that is tied to some other change >> in HEAD as Adrian has reported that it works fine in HEAD. >> >> I'll have to admit that have no idea how to approach figuring this out. >> I'm not sure how I can even revert a part of the commit to get >> 10.2-PRERELEASE working for me. I really wish that a commit as large as this >> one had been MFCed separately. :-( So far there has been only a single >> commit to pci and none to pccbb since 284034, so I built stable with the >> files modified in 281874 manually reverted. > > > I now have r284916M running and it seems to be working fine. All of 284034 > committed except for the MFC from 281874. That left three files conflicting > with STABLE: > /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/pci.c > /usr/src/sys/dev/pci/pci_pci.c > /usr/src/sys/dev/pccbb/pccbb_pci.c > -- > Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired > E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com > PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmon1%2BEDVUnYseXoBRun8uJ=6GwipJP=Jv0egCXWxXvmkJw>