From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758102Ab3BMCRh (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:17:37 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28703 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752195Ab3BMCRg (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:17:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 21:17:29 -0500 From: Dave Jones To: Hugh Dickins Cc: Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Debugging Thinkpad T430s occasional suspend failure. Message-ID: <20130213021729.GA22860@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Hugh Dickins , Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20130212193901.GA18906@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 04:26:22PM -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote: > Me too on T420s, except that is blessed with a blinking CapsLk. > > It's so erratic (though I think I see more failures than you do: I'd say > a quick resume never fails, but an overnight resume fails half the time): > I'm afraid I didn't have the patience to embark on pm_trace at all. > > I did try to bisect it during the -rc5 week. I'm not sure, but I have > no record of seeing it on -rc1 or -rc2, but definitely saw it on -rc3. > So I tried bisecting between -rc2 and -rc3, persisting for a day if it > looked good; but the bisection didn't seem to be converging anywhere > likely when -rc6 came out, and I switched to see if -rc6 solved it. > > I had no problem with -rc6; but with -rc7 it happens more than ever. > Though still not on "quick" resumes, the kind you want to do when > bisecting. > > Sharing these anecdotes in case they match or diverge from your > experience and others, and might help towards finding the cause. > Not-to-be-trusted bisection log appended: of course the bads are > reliable, but perhaps none of the goods. Yeah, my first bisection results look totally different. I can do 100 suspend/resumes fine on 3.6.0, but it fails after just 2-3 on 3.7.0, so it looks like the bug I'm chasing happened before whatever is affecting you. (Or maybe you just didn't get 'lucky' when testing rc1, and it wasn't good after all). Now that I have what appears to be a 'good' candidate, hopefully a bisection can quickly get to the bottom of this. Dave