On Sunday 30 July 2006 12:54, Jiri Slaby wrote: > Uncc: linux-mm > Cc: alsa-devel > Cc: mingo > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sunday 30 July 2006 10:08, Jiri Slaby wrote: > >> Rafael J. Wysocki napsal(a): > >>> On Sunday 30 July 2006 02:06, Pavel Machek wrote: > >>>> Hi! > >>>> > >>>>>>>>> I have problems with swsusp again. While suspending, the very last thing kernel > >>>>>>>>> writes is 'restoring higmem' and then hangs, hardly. No sysrq response at all. > >>>>>>>>> Here is a snapshot of the screen: > >>>>>>>>> http://www.fi.muni.cz/~xslaby/sklad/swsusp_higmem.gif > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> It's SMP system (HT), higmem enabled (1 gig of ram). > >>>>>>>> Most probably it hangs in device_power_up(), so the problem seems to be > >>>>>>>> with one of the devices that are resumed with IRQs off. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Does vanila .18-rc2 work? > >>>>>>> Yup, it does. > >>>>>> Can you try up kernel, no highmem? (mem=512M)? > >>>>> It writes then: > >>>>> p16v: status 0xffffffff, mask 0x00001000, pvoice f7c04a20, use 0 > >>>>> in endless loop when resuming -- after reading from swap. > >>>> Okay, so we have two different problems here. > > [snip] > > >>>> and one is probably driver problem with p16v (whatever it is). > >>>> > >>>> /data/l/linux/sound/pci/emu10k1/irq.c: > >>>> snd_printk(KERN_ERR "p16v: status: 0x%08x, mask=0x%08x, pvoice=%p, > >>>> use=%d\n", status2, mask, pvoice, pvoice->use); > >>>> > >>>> ...aha, so you may want to unload emu10k1 for testing. > >> Sure, this helped. > > > > So, we have two different regressions here. > > > > Please try to revert git-alsa.patch and see if the emu10k1-related problem > > goes away. > > Wow, it didn't helped, I find out there is a difference between in-kernel and > modules version of the driver. When compiled as modules (loaded/unloaded) > suspending (and resuming) is working ok (enabled higmem and preempt back -- > still no smp), when compiled in-kernel (see the config diff below), it doesn't > resume. > @@ -1263,8 +1263,8 @@ > CONFIG_SND=y > CONFIG_SND_TIMER=y > CONFIG_SND_PCM=y > -CONFIG_SND_HWDEP=m > -CONFIG_SND_RAWMIDI=m > +CONFIG_SND_HWDEP=y > +CONFIG_SND_RAWMIDI=y > CONFIG_SND_SEQUENCER=y > # CONFIG_SND_SEQ_DUMMY is not set > CONFIG_SND_OSSEMUL=y > @@ -1282,8 +1282,8 @@ > # > # Generic devices > # > -CONFIG_SND_AC97_CODEC=m > -CONFIG_SND_AC97_BUS=m > +CONFIG_SND_AC97_CODEC=y > +CONFIG_SND_AC97_BUS=y > # CONFIG_SND_DUMMY is not set > # CONFIG_SND_VIRMIDI is not set > # CONFIG_SND_MTPAV is not set > @@ -1347,7 +1347,7 @@ > # CONFIG_SND_INDIGO is not set > # CONFIG_SND_INDIGOIO is not set > # CONFIG_SND_INDIGODJ is not set > -CONFIG_SND_EMU10K1=m > +CONFIG_SND_EMU10K1=y > # CONFIG_SND_EMU10K1X is not set > # CONFIG_SND_ENS1370 is not set > # CONFIG_SND_ENS1371 is not set If the driver is compiled in, its .suspend() routine gets called before the suspend image is restored and puts the card in a state that confuses the .resume() called after the image has been restored. I think snd_emu10k1_suspend() should reset the device if state == PMSG_PRETHAW . > > As far as the first one is concerned, the genirq-* patches look suspicious. > > Hmm, what to do? I would try to revert them altogether and see what happens. If that doesn't help, the only thing that comes to mind is to carry out a binary search for the offending patch. :-( Greetings, Rafael
