On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:55:40AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:22:17 +0200
> Johannes Stezenbach <js@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Fix swsusp failure on !SMP
> >
> > Commit 01599fca6758d2cd133e78f87426fc851c9ea725 introduced
> > a regression which caused a backtrace on suspend and
> > a hang on resume on a Thinkpad T42p (Pentium M CPU).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Stezenbach <js@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.30/kernel/up.c.orig 2009-06-16 15:56:28.000000000 +0200
> > +++ linux-2.6.30/kernel/up.c 2009-06-16 15:57:27.000000000 +0200
> > @@ -10,11 +10,13 @@
> > int smp_call_function_single(int cpu, void (*func) (void *info), void *info,
> > int wait)
> > {
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > +
> > WARN_ON(cpu != 0);
> >
> > - local_irq_disable();
> > + local_irq_save(flags);
> > (func)(info);
> > - local_irq_enable();
> > + local_irq_restore(flags);
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
>
> ok, what's going on here? The patch implies that someone (presumably
> acpi-cpufreq) is calling smp_call_function_single() with local
> interrupts disabled. That's a bug on SMP kernels. And it'll generate
> a trace if it happens:
>
> /* Can deadlock when called with interrupts disabled */
> WARN_ON_ONCE(irqs_disabled() && !oops_in_progress);
>
> but nobody has reported such a trace AFAIK?
This problem apparently only exists on !SMP kernels...
> Also, prior to 01599fca6758d2cd133e78f87426fc851c9ea725, acpi-cpufreq
> was using work_on_cpu(). If it was calling work_on_cpu() with local
> interrupts disabled then that would have been a bug too, which could
> generate might_sleep() or scheduling-while-atomic warnings.
On !SMP, work_on_cpu() is just a function call:
http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.30/include/linux/workqueue.h#L261
> Because it is a bug to call the SMP version of
> smp_call_function_single() with local interrupts disabled, I don't
> think we should need to apply the above patch.
and on SMP, smp_call_function_single() also uses
local_irq_save/restore() iff cpu == this_cpu:
http://lxr.linux.no/linux+v2.6.30/kernel/smp.c#L272
> But I don't know what we _should_ do because I don't know what the bug
> is. Are you able to get us a copy of that stack trace?
Unfortunately my laptop doesn't have a serial port, and the
stack trace is large and scrolls off the screen, I can only
see the last part of it and I would need to find someone with
a camera to take a picture...
Johannes
--
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
