lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH bisected regression] sched: rebuild sched domains at suspend/resume
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2012-03-06 at 16:54 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > I do agree that reverting is probably safer at this point, but can we
> > > > get agreement on this?
> > >
> > > I agree with reverting, shoot it in the head :-) Do you want a git
> > > thingy?
> >
> > Well, it's less a "git thingy" and more that there are tons of people
> > involved with the original commit that haven't even piped up.
> >
> > Srivatsa, Ingo, Prashanth..
> >
> > In fact, I notice that Prashanth doesn't even seem to have been cc'd,
> > even if he's the original reporter of the commit that gets reverted.
> > Added (see lkml)
>
> I forget to mention my kernel boot options. I live with them for a while, so I
> just forget about it.
> "debug threadirqs i915.i915_enable_rc6=1 i915.i915_enable_fbc=1
> i915.lvds_downclock=1 crashkernel=128M"
>
> So, "threadirqs" is a lost piece of the puzzle -- without it I cannot
> reproduce the bug.
> However, I have no idea how this is connected to sched-domains. =)

To be honest, I have no idea either. Can you figure out where the box
hangs or is it in the "silent" phase of suspend/resume?

Thanks,

tglx




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-12 12:25    [W:0.120 / U:1.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site