Could anyone who finds that they are able to suspend/resume with the 2.6.31-14.48 kernel and not with the 2.6.31-15.49 kernel please try the testing steps below and report back on this bug.
Could you install the kernel at the URL below and re-test the suspend/resume. This kernel backs out the change introduced by this bug, but is otherwise identicle to the 2.6.31-15.49 kernel in -proposed:
If that kernel also fails to suspend/resume could you also try the kernel at the URL below and re-test suspend/resume again. This kernel backs out a different change from this update (a USB status change):
Could anyone who finds that they are able to suspend/resume with the 2.6.31-14.48 kernel and not with the 2.6.31-15.49 kernel please try the testing steps below and report back on this bug.
Could you install the kernel at the URL below and re-test the suspend/resume. This kernel backs out the change introduced by this bug, but is otherwise identicle to the 2.6.31-15.49 kernel in -proposed:
http:// people. canonical. com/~apw/ lp464552- karmic/ test1/
If that kernel also fails to suspend/resume could you also try the kernel at the URL below and re-test suspend/resume again. This kernel backs out a different change from this update (a USB status change):
http:// people. canonical. com/~apw/ lp464552- karmic/ test2/
In all cases we are insterested in the reports of both success and failure. Where possible include a dmesg output with your report. Thanks in advance.