Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Roberto Oppedisano
Date: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 - 8:30 pm

Il 09/08/2010 23:23, Tomas M. ha scritto:
Yes,
     this seems to match pretty well.

Kind regards.
R
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Sun Jul 25, 1:27 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sun Jul 25, 3:18 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Sam Ravnborg, (Sun Jul 25, 3:35 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Tue Jul 27, 11:38 am)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Rafael J. Wysocki, (Tue Jul 27, 12:03 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Tue Jul 27, 12:52 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Rafael J. Wysocki, (Tue Jul 27, 3:37 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Wed Jul 28, 12:39 am)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Maciej Rutecki, (Tue Aug 3, 12:20 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Paul Rolland, (Tue Aug 3, 11:37 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Wed Aug 4, 12:39 am)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Tomas M., (Mon Aug 9, 2:23 pm)
Re: 2.6.35 suspend regression (bisected), Roberto Oppedisano, (Tue Aug 24, 8:30 pm)