On Tuesday, 12 June 2007 00:01, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> On the second thought...
>
> On Monday 11 June 2007, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> > I find it hard to accept that IDE patch is to blame for that. ;)
>
> Arrgghhh :) It looks more likely now...
>
> > --- a/drivers/ide/ide.c
> > +++ b/drivers/ide/ide.c
> > @@ -1010,9 +1010,11 @@ static int generic_ide_resume(struct dev
> > {
> > ide_drive_t *drive = dev->driver_data;
> > ide_hwif_t *hwif = HWIF(drive);
> > + ide_driver_t *drv = to_ide_driver(dev->driver);
> > struct request rq;
> > struct request_pm_state rqpm;
> > ide_task_t args;
> > + int err;
> >
> > /* Call ACPI _STM only once */
> > if (!(drive->dn % 2))
> > @@ -1029,7 +1031,12 @@ static int generic_ide_resume(struct dev
> > rqpm.pm_step = ide_pm_state_start_resume;
> > rqpm.pm_state = PM_EVENT_ON;
> >
> > - return ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_head_wait);
> > + err = ide_do_drive_cmd(drive, &rq, ide_head_wait);
> > +
> > + if (err == 0 && drv && drv->resume)
>
> Could you try replacing this by
>
> if (err == 0 && dev->driver && drv->resume)
>
> and see if it fixes the problem?
Yes, that helps. I've just posted a fix patch. :-)
Greetings,
Rafael
--
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
