From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932797Ab2AEQZX (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2012 11:25:23 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45140 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932743Ab2AEQZW (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2012 11:25:22 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 17:25:19 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Stanislaw Gruszka Cc: Yinghai Lu , LKML , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: iwl3945 didn't survive after s2ram failure Message-ID: <20120105162519.GE3937@tiehlicka.suse.cz> References: <20111227105340.GD5344@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20120103103457.GA3391@redhat.com> <20120103130306.GA3891@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20120105110744.GA2222@redhat.com> <20120105141913.GA3937@tiehlicka.suse.cz> <20120105150040.GE2222@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120105150040.GE2222@redhat.com> 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 Thu 05-01-12 16:00:41, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 03:19:13PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > OK, so I have tried to boot with pcie_aspm=off and the wireless > > resurrect. The I found out that I booted into 3.2 rather than 3.2-rc6 so > > I retested with the original kernel and guess what, yes it reported the > > same problem as before (with or without parameter). > > So I have tried to retest with few kernels (3.2.0-rc5, > > 3.2.0-rc6-00005-ga36bfdd, 3.2.0-rc7-00083-g115e8e7 and 3.2.0) that I > > still had on my machine and 3.2.0-rc6-00005-ga36bfdd seems to be the > > only affected one. > > There doesn't seem to be any obvious difference wrt. the driver in the > > logs (attached). > > > > Looking in the history it seems that 497f16f2 [pci: Fix hotplug of > > Express Module with pci bridges] might be related. > > From the changelog of that commit: "I noticed that the bridges get > assigned but do not get enabled", that looks like the problem we had > seen. Yes, I am just wondering why I haven't seen the problem before. I was using rc6 for quite some time and using suspend/resume cycle all the time. It was just after suspend didn't survive when I saw the problem for the first time... -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs SUSE LINUX s.r.o. Lihovarska 1060/12 190 00 Praha 9 Czech Republic