Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Saturday, July 10, 2010, Stephan Diestelhorst wrote: > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, July 09, 2010, Stephan Diestelhorst wrote: > > > > I wrote: > > > > > I have an issue with suspend to RAM and I/O load on a disk. Symptoms > > > > > are that the disk does not respond to requests when woken up, producing > > > > > only I/O errors on all tested kernels (newest 2.6.35-rc4 (Ubuntu > > > > > mainline PPA build)): > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > This can be triggered most reliably with multiple "direct" writes to > > > > > disk, I create the load with the attached script. If the issue is > > > > > triggered, suspend (through pm-suspend) takes very long. > > > > > > > > > IMHO the interesting log output during suspend is: > > > > > [ 1674.700125] ata1.00: qc timeout (cmd 0xec) > > I have a box where this problem is kind of reproducible, but it happens _very_ > rarely. Also I can't reproduce it on demand running suspend-resume in a tight > loop. Are you able to reproduce it more regurarly? For me it is much more reproducible. If I run multiple direct writing dd-s to the disk in question I trigger it rather reliably (~75% or higher). See the attached script from an earlier email. Maybe that helps triggering your case more reliabl, too? > Also, what kind of disk do you use? It is a Samsung HM321HI in a Samsung Eikee R525 notebook, please also see my smartctl -a log, attached earlier. Interesting, I have a similar symptom on one of my home servers, which has a *Samsung* SpinPoint F1 and it went away with different disks. So maybe these disks are either faulty themselves or they trigger the issue more often? I also have a LVM on top of LUKS on the disk. So the I/O will also add some computational overhead for encryption. Stephan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ide" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
