On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 05:50:47PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Sudeep, > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 3:18 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 29/05/18 12:56, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 1:14 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On 29/05/18 11:48, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >>>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 7:05 PM, Catalin Marinas > >>>> <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 06:57:55PM -0500, Jeremy Linton wrote: > >>>>>> Jeremy Linton (12): > >>>>>> arm64: topology: divorce MC scheduling domain from core_siblings > >>>>> > >>>>> Queued for 4.18 (without Sudeep's latest property_read_u64 cacheinfo > >>>>> patch - http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin; I > >>>>> can add it separately). > >>>> > >>>> This is now commit 37c3ec2d810f87ea ("arm64: topology: divorce MC > >>>> scheduling domain from core_siblings") in arm64/for-next/core, causing > >>>> system suspend on big.LITTLE systems to hang after shutting down the first > >>>> CPU: > >>>> > >>>> $ echo mem > /sys/power/state > >>>> PM: suspend entry (deep) > >>>> PM: Syncing filesystems ... done. > >>>> Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done. > >>>> OOM killer disabled. > >>>> Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done. > >>>> Disabling non-boot CPUs ... > >>>> CPU1: shutdown > >>>> psci: CPU1 killed. > >>> > >>> Is it OK to assume the suspend failed just after shutting down one CPU > >>> or it's failing during resume ? It depends on whether you had console > >>> disabled or not. > >> > >> I have no-console-suspend enabled. > >> It's failing during suspend, the next lines should be: > >> > >> CPU2: shutdown > >> psci: CPU2 killed. > >> ... > > > > OK, I was hoping to be something during resume as this patch has nothing > > executed during suspend. Do you see any change in topology before and > > after this patch applied. I am interested in the output of: > > > > $ grep "" /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/topology/* > > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/core_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/core_siblings:0f > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/core_siblings_list:0-3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/physical_package_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/thread_siblings:01 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/thread_siblings_list:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/core_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/core_siblings:0f > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/core_siblings_list:0-3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/physical_package_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/thread_siblings:02 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/topology/thread_siblings_list:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/core_id:2 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/core_siblings:0f > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/core_siblings_list:0-3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/physical_package_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/thread_siblings:04 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/topology/thread_siblings_list:2 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/core_id:3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/core_siblings:0f > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/core_siblings_list:0-3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/physical_package_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/thread_siblings:08 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/topology/thread_siblings_list:3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/core_id:0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/core_siblings:f0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/core_siblings_list:4-7 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/physical_package_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/thread_siblings:10 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/topology/thread_siblings_list:4 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/core_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/core_siblings:f0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/core_siblings_list:4-7 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/physical_package_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/thread_siblings:20 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/topology/thread_siblings_list:5 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/core_id:2 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/core_siblings:f0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/core_siblings_list:4-7 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/physical_package_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/thread_siblings:40 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/topology/thread_siblings_list:6 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/core_id:3 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/core_siblings:f0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/core_siblings_list:4-7 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/physical_package_id:1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/thread_siblings:80 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/topology/thread_siblings_list:7 > > No change before/after (both match my view of the hardware). There shouldn't be any change in the reported topology with this patch as that the topology_* functions are not touched by the patch. The patch should only affect the topology used by the scheduler which isn't necessarily the same as the user-space visible one. Morten -- 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
