Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 18 [ BROKEN suspend: jbd2|acpi|pm? ]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:58 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Saturday, January 19, 2013 12:41:11 AM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:39 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> > On Saturday, January 19, 2013 12:28:55 AM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> >> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> > On Friday, January 18, 2013 11:56:53 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> >> >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> >> > On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:20 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> >> >> On Friday, January 18, 2013 11:11:07 PM Sedat Dilek wrote:
>>> >> >> >>> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:37 AM, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >> >> >>> > Hi all,
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > Changes since 20130117:
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > Undropped tree: samung
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > The powerpc tree still had a build failure.
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > The driver-core tree gained a build failure for which I applied a merge
>>> >> >> >>> > fix patch.
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > The gpio-lw tree gained a build failure so I used the version from
>>> >> >> >>> > next-20130117.
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > The samsung tree lost the majority of its conflicts but gained more
>>> >> >> >>> > against the arm-soc and slave-dma tree.
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> >>> >
>>> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >>> From my dmesg diff-file:
>>> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >>> +[  288.730849] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
>>> >> >> >>> +[  294.050498] Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.04 seconds) done.
>>> >> >> >>> +[  294.097024] Freezing remaining freezable tasks ...
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098849] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.01 seconds (1 tasks
>>> >> >> >>> refusing to freeze, wq_busy=0):
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098862] jbd2/loop0-8    D ffffffff8180d780     0   297      2 0x00000000
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098865]  ffff880117ec5b68 0000000000000046 ffff880117ec5b08
>>> >> >> >>> ffffffff81044c29
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098868]  ffff88011829dc80 ffff880117ec5fd8 ffff880117ec5fd8
>>> >> >> >>> ffff880117ec5fd8
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098871]  ffff880119b34560 ffff88011829dc80 ffff880117ec5b68
>>> >> >> >>> ffff88011fad4738
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098873] Call Trace:
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098881]  [<ffffffff81044c29>] ? default_spin_lock_flags+0x9/0x10
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098885]  [<ffffffff811c63e0>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098888]  [<ffffffff816b4b59>] schedule+0x29/0x70
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098890]  [<ffffffff816b4c2f>] io_schedule+0x8f/0xd0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098892]  [<ffffffff811c63ee>] sleep_on_buffer+0xe/0x20
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098896]  [<ffffffff816b342f>] __wait_on_bit+0x5f/0x90
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098898]  [<ffffffff811c5aa1>] ? submit_bh+0x121/0x1e0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098900]  [<ffffffff811c63e0>] ? __wait_on_buffer+0x30/0x30
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098903]  [<ffffffff816b34dc>] out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x7c/0x90
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098906]  [<ffffffff8107eb00>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x40/0x40
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098909]  [<ffffffff811c63de>] __wait_on_buffer+0x2e/0x30
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098913]  [<ffffffff8128a6a1>]
>>> >> >> >>> jbd2_journal_commit_transaction+0x1791/0x1960
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098917]  [<ffffffff8109269d>] ? sched_clock_cpu+0xbd/0x110
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098920]  [<ffffffff8107eac0>] ? add_wait_queue+0x60/0x60
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098923]  [<ffffffff81069fbf>] ? try_to_del_timer_sync+0x4f/0x70
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098925]  [<ffffffff8128e4e8>] kjournald2+0xb8/0x240
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098927]  [<ffffffff8107eac0>] ? add_wait_queue+0x60/0x60
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098929]  [<ffffffff8128e430>] ? commit_timeout+0x10/0x10
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098931]  [<ffffffff8107ded0>] kthread+0xc0/0xd0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098933]  [<ffffffff8107de10>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xb0/0xb0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098936]  [<ffffffff816be52c>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098938]  [<ffffffff8107de10>] ? flush_kthread_worker+0xb0/0xb0
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098969]
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.098970] Restarting kernel threads ... done.
>>> >> >> >>> +[  314.099052] Restarting tasks ... done.
>>> >> >> >>>
>>> >> >> >>> Please, have a lot at it.
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> This is a freezer failure while freezing kernel threads, so I don't think it's
>>> >> >> >> related to ACPI or PM directly.
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >> Does it happen on every suspend?
>>> >> >> >>
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > No, I only did one S/R.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > I have built a 2nd new kernel where I pulled-in latest pm.git#linux-next.
>>> >> >> > With this kernel two S/Rs were fine - but that says not much.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> After several S/Rs on the "buggy" -1 kernel I know see in my syslogs:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  141.853828] Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  141.956943] smpboot: CPU 1 is now offline
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  141.957438] NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 02
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  141.957454] NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 02
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  142.060830] smpboot: CPU 2 is now offline
>>> >> >> Jan 18 23:50:02 fambox kernel: [  142.164639] smpboot: CPU 3 is now offline
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Are you worried about the "local_softirq_pending" messages?
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> That's the only new messages I have seen after several S/Rs.
>>> >
>>> > They are kind of unusual.
>>> >
>>> > Anyway, they seem to be related to CPU hotplug (CPU offline), so you can try
>>> > if you can trigger them through the sysfs CPU offline/online interface.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Can you explain that a bit clearer or give some sample lines for testing?
>>
>> There is a sysfs file
>>
>> /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpuX/online
>>
>> (where X=0,1,2,3,...) for each CPU core in the system.  The value read from it
>> indicates whether or not the given core is online (1 means online).  Writing 0
>> to it means that the given core should be put offline.  Writing 1 means to put
>> it back online.  You can simply write first 0s and than 1s to those files
>> for CPUs > 0 multiple times in a row and see if that triggers messages like the
>> above.  If it does, that may mean there's been a change in kernel/cpu.c, for
>> example, that causes it to appear.  The change may have been made somewhere in
>> arch/x86 too, though.
>>
>

TESTCASE:

root# cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online
1

root# echo "0" > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/online

...machine freezes immediately!

I had 3 terminals open logging kernlog, syslog and messages, but no
lines displayed!
Machine required a hard/cold reboot.

- Sedat -

> [ CCing x86 folks ]
>
> Thanks for the explanations.
>
>>> >> If you have a testcase for me to reproduce it here, I would be happy.
>>> >
>>> > Do you mean the freezer-related issue?
>>> >
>>>
>>> Any one as I am still stepping in the dark.
>>> I checked my disc-space as I built a lot of software today and run
>>> once out of space.
>>> But 1.7GiB should be enough on / for testing.
>>> I wanted to run the new LTP version I built the last days.
>>> Let's see what I get...
>>
>> Stress-testing the freezer is rather easy and doesn't require disk space.
>> All it takes is to echo "freezer" to /sys/power/pm_test and then do
>> "echo mem > /sys/power/state && sleep 1" in a loop.  This is described in
>> Documentation/power/basic-pm-debugging.txt IIRC.
>>
>
> Didn't know there is some cool docs about PM around.
> I will look into this.
>
> Furthermore, I have seen on a restart...
>
>      BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 23s! [kworker/3:2:6079]
>
> ...approx 10 lines and a nothing happened I turned the machine off via
> power-button.
>
> - Sedat -
>
>> Thanks,
>> Rafael
>>
>>
>> --
>> I speak only for myself.
>> Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux USB Development]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux