** Description changed:

  [Impact]
  
-  * An explanation of the effects of the bug on users and
+ The fix for bug #1882272, currently applied to Impish and Jammy via a
+ debian sync, has a collateral effect that it may leave the fancontrol
+ service started after a resume from suspend even if it was disabled
+ and/or stopped.
  
-  * justification for backporting the fix to the stable release.
+ The fix wraps the restart call in a is-active check, and only issues the
+ restart if the fancontrol service was running before (at suspend time).
  
-  * In addition, it is helpful, but not required, to include an
-    explanation of how the upload fixes this bug.
  
  [Test Plan]
  
-  * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug
+  * detailed instructions how to reproduce the bug
  
-  * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected
-    package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes
-    the problem.
+  * these should allow someone who is not familiar with the affected
+    package to reproduce the bug and verify that the updated package fixes
+    the problem.
  
-  * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update,
-    this should also be described here.
+  * if other testing is appropriate to perform before landing this update,
+    this should also be described here.
  
  [Where problems could occur]
  
-  * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is
-    wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up?
+  * Think about what the upload changes in the software. Imagine the change is
+    wrong or breaks something else: how would this show up?
  
-  * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before
-    upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important
-    to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the
-    event of a regression.
+  * It is assumed that any SRU candidate patch is well-tested before
+    upload and has a low overall risk of regression, but it's important
+    to make the effort to think about what ''could'' happen in the
+    event of a regression.
  
-  * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why
-    your upload is low risk.
+  * This must '''never''' be "None" or "Low", or entirely an argument as to why
+    your upload is low risk.
  
-  * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered,
-    and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.
+  * This both shows the SRU team that the risks have been considered,
+    and provides guidance to testers in regression-testing the SRU.
  
  [Other Info]
-  
-  * Anything else you think is useful to include
-  * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and 
the Technical Board
-  * and address these questions in advance
+ 
+  * Anything else you think is useful to include
+  * Anticipate questions from users, SRU, +1 maintenance, security teams and 
the Technical Board
+  * and address these questions in advance
  
  [Original Description]
  
  The fix for bug #1882272 issues a "systemctl restart fancontrol" when
  resuming from suspend. This ignores the fact that fancontrol could have
  been disabled, or could not even have been runing at suspend time.
  
  I suggest to wrap the restart with a "systemctl is-active
  fancontrol.service" call, and only issue the restart if fancontrol was
  already running when the machine was suspended.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1967432

Title:
  After resume from suspend, fancontrol can be running even if it was
  disabled before

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lm-sensors/+bug/1967432/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to