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?
If dev->driver is NULL drv won't be because to_ide_driver() is just
a wrapper for container_of().
Thanks,
Bart
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
