From jm@jm.xdns.eu Sat Jul 19 17:23:38 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: tuxonice-users@crca.org.au Delivered-To: tuxonice-users@crca.org.au X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000000 Received: from mail.tuxonice.net (tuxonice.net [67.207.135.122]) by crca.org.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A45D138004 for ; Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:23:38 +0000 (UTC) X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000000 Received: from jm.xdns.eu (ble59-2-81-56-123-123.fbx.proxad.net [81.56.123.123]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.tuxonice.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71AE0230C94 for ; Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:23:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from julien ([192.168.0.2]) by jm.xdns.eu with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KKFGc-0002zM-BH for tuxonice-users@lists.tuxonice.net; Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:26:42 +0200 Message-ID: <488215C1.4020808@jm10.no-ip.com> Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:26:41 +0200 From: jm@jm10.no-ip.com User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080509) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: tuxonice-users@lists.tuxonice.net References: <4825A9A5.8040908@jm10.no-ip.com> <1210458648.9675.2.camel@nigel-laptop> <482728B7.30406@jm10.no-ip.com> <1210541552.18009.1.camel@nigel-laptop> In-Reply-To: <1210541552.18009.1.camel@nigel-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: jm@jm.xdns.eu Subject: Re: [TuxOnIce-users] 3.0-rc7 regression: can't resume X-BeenThere: tuxonice-users@lists.tuxonice.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: TuxOnIce users' list List-Id: TuxOnIce users' list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:23:38 -0000 Hello, I have good news about this bug (can't resume: "Decompression yielded xxx bytes instead of yyy."). I recently tried to upgrade my machines (laptop + desktop) from 2.6.24.x/3.0-rc5 to tuxonice-2.6.26.git. Both machines are patched with loop-aes and hibernate in a loop-aes-v3 encrypted partition. This regression is still there on my laptop (filewriter), but I don't have the problem on my desktop (swapwriter). So I tried swapwriter on the laptop and it works! :) Anyway, I discovered TOI can suspend on an unused swap partition. This is even better than having a filewriter partition. To sum up: * I am very happy I am not stuck to 2.6.24.x/3.0-rc5. * The regression only affects filewriter. * I am not concerned anymore by this bug. JM Nigel Cunningham a écrit : > Hi. > > On Sun, 2008-05-11 at 19:11 +0200, Julien Muchembled wrote: >> Nigel Cunningham a écrit : >>> Do you get that bug on every attempt at resuming? >> Yes. >> >>> When you try rc7, is it being applied to exactly the same kernel as rc5 >>> was being applied to? >> Yes. >> 16 days ago, I only tried to upgrade from 2.6.24.4/3.0-rc5 to >> 2.6.25/3.0-rc7. >> >> I've just retried to upgrade TOI only (-> 2.6.24.4/3.0-rc7) and it fails >> too. >> (tried also 2.6.25.3 and 2.6.24.7 -> crash) > > Okay. Thanks. > >>> If you (temporarily) disable the encryption, does it work okay? >> No! I am surprised to see that it also crashes without encryption. >> More precisely: >> /dev/sda1 / xfs >> /dev/sda2 filewriter/lzf >> /dev/loop0 ~jm xfs # not mounted > > Ok. That's helpful. > >> Attaching pictures for 2.6.25.3/3.0-rc7 >> (about ACPI errors: I have acpi.debug_level=0xF267A02F in cmdline) >> >> JM >> >> PS: Not sending to the ml due to the size of the photos > > Thanks! > > Nigel