On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Thomas Gleixner wrote:I think its better to leave it as false, so we don't reset the NTP state machine completely after suspend.
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:Actually that's a bad idea. John want's to double check vs. the
On Monday, July 16, 2012, Thomas Gleixner wrote:I'm still packing gear. So i'll push it into timers/urgent.On Sun, 15 Jul 2012, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:I'm not saying that you didn't consider it thoroughly, but unfortunately youTo everyone involved: the fact that this change, which was likely to introduceWell, we spent an massive amount of time in testing, reviewing and
regressions from the look of it alone, has been pushed to Linus (an to -stable
at the same time!) so late in the cycle, is seriuosly disappointing.
discussion and it definitely did not break suspend/resume here.
did overlook this particular issue, didn't you?
This was not pushed without a lot of thoughts and in fact what you areYes, it does, thanks!
seing is another long standing bug in the timekeeping resume code,
which was just papered over by the incorrect handling of the clock was
set cases in the other parts of the system.
Does the following patch fix the problem for you ?
@John: Should that clear ntp as well or is it enough to set ntp_errorSo who's going to take care of the patch? :-)
to 0 ?
/me really goes on vacation now.
ntp_clear question. So John can send it to linus directly.
@John: Should it be: timekeeping_update(true)
Now I'm gone for real.Ok. Thanks for spinning this up so quickly. I'll go ahead and send it on to Linus.