On Friday, 13 April 2007 12:14, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 4/12/07, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, 11 April 2007 17:02, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > Rafael J. Wysocki napsal(a): > > > > On Wednesday, 11 April 2007 12:45, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > >> Rafael J. Wysocki napsal(a): > > > >>> On Wednesday, 11 April 2007 09:36, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > >>>> Rafael J. Wysocki napsal(a): > > > >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2007 22:07, Jiri Slaby wrote: > > > >>>>>> I have bad news for you :(. I thought I had unpatched kernel, but it happens > > > >>>>>> in -rc6 too. > > > >>>>> I guess you mean you're still seeing the 'not enough memory to suspend' > > > >>>>> problem? > > > >>>> Yes: > > > >>>> Disabling non-boot CPUs ... > > > >>>> kvm: disabling virtualization on CPU1 > > > >>>> Breaking affinity for irq 9 > > > >>>> CPU 1 is now offline > > > >>>> SMP alternatives: switching to UP code > > > >>>> CPU1 is down > > > >>>> swsusp: critical section: > > > >>>> swsusp: Need to copy 158309 pages > > > >>>> swsusp: Not enough free memory > > > >>>> Error -12 suspending > > > >>>> Enabling non-boot CPUs ... > > > >>>> SMP alternatives: switching to SMP code > > > >>>> Booting processor 1/2 APIC 0x1 > > > >>>> Initializing CPU#1 > > > >>> How reproducible is it? I'm going to try to reproduce it on one of my boxes. > > > >> My tip is one of three cases: after some work on fresh boot -- some > > > >> consumers such as thunderbird, firefox, 10 or so terminals with > > > >> gnome-session. Single xterm + gnome-session semms not to be a problem. > > > > > > > > Does the workaround with setting the image size below 1/2 of RAM work for you? > > > > > > Yes. Yesterday I must set the value to 350M -- 400M was not enough. > > > > Well, I can't reproduce it. > > > > Can you please try to reproduce it with the appended patch applied and send > > the output of dmesg to me? > > > > Greetings, > > Rafael > > > > --- > > kernel/power/snapshot.c | 4 ++-- > > kernel/power/swsusp.c | 16 ++++++++++++---- > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > Shrinking memory... Pages needed: 128103 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: 125226 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -5757 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -5757 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -5757 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -5757 > Pages needed: 127953 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: 125076 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -6043 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -6043 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -6043 normal, 0 highmem > Pages needed: -6043 > done (200 pages freed) > Freed 800 kbytes in 0.16 seconds (5.00 MB/s) > Suspending console(s) > ... > CPU1 is down > swsusp: critical section: > swsusp: Need to copy 131358 pages > swsusp: Normal pages needed: 131358 > swsusp: Normal pages needed: 131358 + 1024 + 22, available pages: 130607 Well, it looks like someone allocated about 6000 pages after we had freed enough memory for suspending. I suspect one of the device drivers plays some dirty tricks in its .suspend() routine. Now the question is which one. I wonder if setting PAGES_FOR_IO in include/linux/suspend.h to eg. 8192 will help. > swsusp: Not enough free memory > Error -12 suspending > Enabling non-boot CPUs ... > SMP alternatives: switching to SMP code > Booting processor 1/2 APIC 0x1 > Not responding. > Inquiring remote APIC #1... > ... APIC #1 ID: failed > ... APIC #1 VERSION: failed > ... APIC #1 SPIV: failed > kvm: disabling virtualization on CPU1 > Error taking CPU1 up: -5 > PCI: Setting latency timer of device 0000:00:01.0 to 64 > > Please note the CPU#1 bring up problem too. Yes, and this seems to be related to the APIC. Gautham, can you please tell me who's the right person to ask about it? Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
