Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Suspend-resume failure on Intel Eagle Lake Core2Duo | From | Martin Peres <> | Date | Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:34:03 +0300 |
| |
On 27/07/17 10:36, Tomi Sarvela wrote: > On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote: >>> On 25/07/17 10:01, Tomi Sarvela wrote: >>>> On 24/07/17 19:37, Martin Peres wrote: >>>>> On 24/07/17 19:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote: >>>>>>> On 24/07/17 18:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>>>> Output of 'cat /proc/interrupts' and a description what kind of >>>>>>>> 'old' Intel >>>>>>>> platform that is. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, I should have repeated the name outside of just the >>>>>>> subject of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> email. It is an Intel Eagle Lake Core2Duo. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hoped you would give me a little bit more details, but I Gurgled it >>>>>> now. I try to find such a beast and look what's wrong there. If I >>>>>> can't >>>>>> find one, I'll come back with some debug patches. >>>>> >>>>> Ha, sorry! >>>>> >>>>> Here is all the info I have: >>>>> - Hardware: HP Compaq 8000 >>>>> - CPU: Eagle Lake Core2Duo E7500 >>>> >>>> As mentioned, it's HP Compaq 8000 Elite, desktop tower in most basic >>>> configuration: one SATA SSD, 4GB memory and so on. Most recent BIOS >>>> from >>>> around 2012, no UEFI. >>>> >>>> If you have proposed fix for the issue, I'll be happy to test them. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>> >>> Thanks for the information Tomi. >>> >>> Thomas, any update on this? Another user reported the problem: >> >> Not yet. >> >>> "I have the same thing on an old cheap laptop. >>> model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU >>> cpu family : 6 >>> model : 15 >>> >>> Previously, this never happened on the kernel series 4.{10,11,12}. >>> After reverted commit bf22ff45bed664 on 4.13-rc2, unfortunately it >>> still hangs >>> when it wakes up. >> >> So reverting that commit does not help. Does it help on your machine? > > Yes. Reverting it does not cause the machine to lock up on resume. > > I haven't tested if the machine locks up later on, but at least it > survives couple of s/r cycles
FYI, the user who reported reverting the patch was not sufficient actually now says he was hit by a second bug which he found.
So, a revert is always possible.
Cheers, Martin
| |