> I'm averse to quirks and I really hate that the Linux kernel already contains
> hundreds of them, so at least to me the solution with a delay sounds the most
> sensible.

I am too, but this one is too visible to make generic.

> I guess very few Linux users will object if it doesn't blow up everything
> else.

Well it's a pretty big behavior change.  I found that when it is in
place if I close my lid and then open it immediately I can't wake up
immediately because that 2.5s hasn't passed yet to even start the
suspend.

Or if I close my lid before putting a laptop in the bag I would expect
all the fans stop before I put it in the bag.  Well now you close your
lid and the fans are still running?  That makes you think there is a
problem, so you open it back up to check.

If we're going to keep "some" variation of it around for everyone I
would rather it be on an interruptible timer, which means maybe putting
it somewhere earlier in the sequence that interrupts are still enabled.

I don't really know what could be different with what Linux does with
the EC in these two cases, and hopefully that gives us some insight on
the best solution.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2088733

Title:
  low CPU frequency after wake up AMD Ryzen

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/linux/+bug/2088733/+subscriptions


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

Reply via email to