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. > >> >> 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. > OK, I will enable CONFIG_PM_DEBUG! [ QUOTE ] 184 Namely, after writing "freezer", "devices", "platform", "processors", or "core" 185 into /sys/power/pm_test (available if the kernel is compiled with 186 CONFIG_PM_DEBUG set) the suspend code will work in the test mode corresponding 187 to given string. [ /QUOTE ] - Sedat - [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git;a=blob;f=Documentation/power/basic-pm-debugging.txt;hb=refs/tags/v3.8-rc4#l184 > 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
