On Thursday 17 August 2006 05:15, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Len Brown wrote:
>
> > > acpi_pci_link_set() allocates with GFP_ATOMIC. On resume from suspend,
> > > this is called with interrupts off, otherwise GFP_KERNEL is safe.
> > So you are suggesting this?
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> > index 7f3e7e7..d53bd98 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_link.c
> > @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ static int acpi_pci_link_set(struct acpi
> > if (!link || !irq)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - resource = kmalloc(sizeof(*resource) + 1, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + resource = kmalloc(sizeof(*resource) + 1, irqs_disabled() ? GFP_ATOMIC: GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (!resource)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >
>
> Yes, exactly.
Applied.
> > > acpi_pci_link_resume -> acpi_pci_link_set -> acpi_set_current_resources ->
> > > acpi_rs_set_srs_method_data -> acpi_ut_create_internal_object_dbg ->
> > > acpi_ut_allocate_object_desc_dbg -> acpi_os_acquire_object ->
> > > kmem_cache_alloc(GFP_KERNEL) flag.
> > I don't understand this comment.
> > acpi_os_acquire_object is implemented in aclinux.h:
> > static inline void *acpi_os_acquire_object(acpi_cache_t * cache) {
> > return kmem_cache_zalloc(cache, irqs_disabled() ? GFP_ATOMIC : GFP_KERNEL);
> > }
>
> This happened in some -rc of 2.6.18 (can be seen at
> http://www.kernel.org/diff/diffview.cgi?file=%2Fpub%2Flinux%2Fkernel%2Fv2.6%2Ftesting%2Fpatch-2.6.18-rc4.bz2;z=2727)
> - the acpi_os_acquire_object() was renamed to acpi_os_validate_interface()
> ... which allocates solely with GFP_KERNEL, but this may be OK, I haven't
> checked.
Look at that diff more closely.
acpi_os_acquire_object() was removed -- and the kmalloc() went away with it.
acpi_os_validate_interface() is an empty stub right now, with no kmalloc at all.
yes, reading flat diffs can get confusing.
> Anyway ...
>
> Unfortunately, looking at the refactorized ACPI code in
> 2.6.18-rc4, there are still issues with sleeping functions called with
> disabled interrupts (during resume), in ACPI code.
>
> Two random examples:
>
> - when acpi_pci_link_set() is called during resume (local irqs off), the
> following callchain happens, which is bad: acpi_pci_link_resume ->
> acpi_pci_link_set -> acpi_set_current_resources ->
> acpi_rs_set_srs_method_data -> acpi_ns_evaluate -> acpi_ns_get_node ..
> here the mutex is acquired. Not good.
This uses acpi_os_acquire_semaphore(), which is fixed in my tree
and greg's tree -- post -rc4.
> - device_power_up -> sysdev_resume -> __sysdev_resume -> cpufreq_resume ->
> blocking_notifier_call_chain -> down on semaphore. Not good.
contact the cpufreq list about this one.
> Is there any general idea for solution?
This is exactly like when the system boots -- single threaded, interrupts off,
allocations and mutexes are assumed to be guaranteed to succeeded w/o sleeping.
to address this on boot, Linux uses system-state.
I suggested doing the same for resume, but Andrew didn't like it, so here we
are chasing a bunch of spurious warning messages.
Got any random examples that are still valid in greg's tree, my tree, or the latest mm?
thanks,
-Len
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
