Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Alan Jenkins
Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Monday 13 April 2009 01:57:00 pm Alan Jenkins wrote: Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Sunday 12 April 2009 07:11:57 am Alan Jenkins wrote: You mention that this occurs when booting off battery. So I assume everything works fine when the EEE is plugged in to the

Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Alan Jenkins
Alan Jenkins wrote: Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Monday 13 April 2009 01:57:00 pm Alan Jenkins wrote: Bjorn Helgaas wrote: On Sunday 12 April 2009 07:11:57 am Alan Jenkins wrote: You mention that this occurs when booting off battery. So I assume everything works

Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Bjorn Helgaas
On Tuesday 14 April 2009 09:17:28 am Arjan van de Ven wrote: On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 08:59:01 -0600 Bjorn Helgaas bjorn.helg...@hp.com wrote: I can't help with the real problem of why the asynchronous battery init causes the hang. that got fixed already for the module case. But apparently

Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Bjorn Helgaas
On Tuesday 14 April 2009 09:55:58 am Moore, Robert wrote: In fact, ACPI methods can execute concurrently -- constrained by the ACPI specification itself. The big lock is released before anything that will block for a significant amount of time, allowing other methods to run. We had a

RE: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Moore, Robert
Your understanding is correct. The only interesting thing that happens when executing the battery methods like _STA, _BIF, and _BST is that the EC is usually involved - and this can be slow. Note that the AML interpreter is unlocked before accessing an EC operation region. -Original

Re: [BISECTED] EEE PC hangs when booting off battery

2009-04-14 Thread Alan Jenkins
So I guess the problem is that the other ACPI modules execute methods which also need to access the EC. And it's the EC that causes them to be serialized against the battery module. Moore, Robert wrote: Your understanding is correct. The only interesting thing that happens when executing the

[PATCH] thermal: Fix polling frequency for systems without passive cooling

2009-04-14 Thread Matthew Garrett
The polling interval (in deciseconds) was accidently interpreted as being in milliseconds in one codepath, resulting in excessively frequent polling. Ensure that the conversion is performed. Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett m...@redhat.com --- diff --git a/drivers/acpi/thermal.c

Re: panic on rmmod of nf_conntrack_irc

2009-04-14 Thread Mariusz Kozlowski
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:14:20 +0200 Eric Dumazet da...@cosmosbay.com wrote: Mariusz Kozlowski a écrit : On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:16:37 +0200 Patrick McHardy ka...@trash.net wrote: Eric Dumazet wrote: Patrick McHardy a écrit : Mariusz Kozlowski wrote: netfilter: nf_conntrack: use

[PATCH] netfilter: nf_log fix

2009-04-14 Thread Eric Dumazet
Eric Leblond a écrit : Hi, Le mardi 14 avril 2009 à 22:14 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit : Mariusz Kozlowski a écrit : On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:16:37 +0200 Patrick McHardy ka...@trash.net wrote: Eric Dumazet wrote: Patrick McHardy a écrit : Mariusz Kozlowski wrote: netfilter:

Re: panic on rmmod of nf_conntrack_irc

2009-04-14 Thread Eric Leblond
Hi, Le mardi 14 avril 2009 à 22:14 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit : Mariusz Kozlowski a écrit : On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:16:37 +0200 Patrick McHardy ka...@trash.net wrote: Eric Dumazet wrote: Patrick McHardy a écrit : Mariusz Kozlowski wrote: netfilter: nf_conntrack: use