Bug 1289631

Summary:	Wifi adapter does not turn on after resume from suspend
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Vinicius Reis <angiolucci>
Component:	systemd	Assignee:	systemd-maint
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	23	CC:	johannbg, lnykryn, msekleta, s, systemd-maint, zbyszek
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2015-12-09 00:51:53 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Vinicius Reis 2015-12-08 15:44:58 UTC

Description of problem:
Wifi adapter does not turn on after resume from suspend.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
systemd-222-8.fc23

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Turn on laptop and do login.
2. Suspend it (lid close, power button, etc)
3. Wait 3 or more seconds
4. Lid open (or use another way to wakeup from suspend)

Actual results:
Wifi adapter does not wake up, it is turned off. Need to manually turn it on.

Expected results:
A working and turned on Wifi adapter.

Additional info:

Previously reported as a NetworkManager issue, but it seems not to be the case, see comment #15 in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1257368

Hardware info:
$ lspci | grep -i wireless
01:00.0 Network controller: Intel Corporation Wireless 7265 (rev 59)

Comment 1 Vinicius Reis 2015-12-08 15:49:37 UTC

Just a small fix on external url in my last comment:

"Previously reported as a NetworkManager issue, but it seems not to be the case, see last 6 lines on comment 15 in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1257368#c15"

Comment 2 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2015-12-09 00:51:53 UTC

Since systemd is most likely the reason for the other bug, you should just reassign it. You shouldn't open a second bug for the same issue, it will just confuse everybody.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1257368 ***

Comment 3 Vinicius Reis 2015-12-09 01:05:53 UTC

Hello,

I've tried to reassign the other bug, but I'm not the person who opened it, so I can't do that.
I've also asked to the person who opened it and to other developers to reassign it, but no one helped.

The other bug is now in a "zombie state", abandoned by its original reporter and treated as a (pontetially) systemd issue by NetworkManager developers.

Everything I could do is open a new bug and reference the old one, but you're saying that it is not right. 

So, what should I do? Can you help me to reassign the old bug to systemd? 

Thank you.

Comment 4 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek 2015-12-09 02:13:23 UTC

Ah, OK. I scanned the other bug, but didn't see that you tried to have it reassigned. I reassigned it already, my comment was just a FYI.