Re: [RFT] x86 acpi: normalize segment descriptor register on resume

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 09:20:24 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > The appended patch fixes a regression and is considered as 2.6.26 
> > > material. Everyone having a box with working suspend to RAM is gently 
> > > requested to test it and verify if it doesn't break things.
> > > 
> > > The patch applies to the current -git.
> > 
> > The fix is _really_ tempting, but i think it's 2.6.26.1 material at the 
> > earliest. I just counted about 8 red flag items in that commit:
> > 
> >   - "assembly code"
> >   - "fresh change"
> >   - "suspend/resume"
> >   - "real-mode code"
> >   - "ACPI"
> >   - "SMM"
> >   - "CPU erratas"
> >   - "boot code"
> > 
> > I'd say it's probably 90% fine, but it's just too much risk at this 
> > stage i think. The regression was only found 2 weeks ago, and the commit 
> > that broke it was upstream for 2 months (and was under testing for about 
> > 4 months).
> 
> Merge it into 2.6.27-rc1 and add Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxx> to the changelog with
> a note "needed in 2.6.26.x after a couple of weeks testing in mainline" or
> something like that.

ok.

> I expect 2.6.25.x will be maintained for a while yet too...

2.6.25.x is not affected by the suspend+resume aspect of this problem.

	Ingo
--
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/