On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Michal Piotrowski wrote: > > It is too stable for me. I wish all our testers were you ;) > this looks harmless > > [ 116.733327] PM: suspend-to-disk mode set to 'shutdown' > [ 116.738849] swsusp: Basic memory bitmaps created > [ 116.745353] Stopping tasks ... WARNING: at /home/devel/linux-git/kernel/lockdep.c:2414 check_flags() > [ 116.754921] [<c0404fbf>] show_trace_log_lvl+0x1a/0x2f > [ 116.754937] [<c0405bd6>] show_trace+0x12/0x14 > [ 116.754947] [<c0405c5d>] dump_stack+0x16/0x18 > [ 116.754957] [<c043c3e5>] check_flags+0x95/0x143 > [ 116.754967] [<c043f158>] lock_acquire+0x29/0x82 > [ 116.754977] [<c06313a7>] _spin_lock+0x35/0x42 > [ 116.754990] [<c044894a>] refrigerator+0x14/0xc6 > [ 116.755002] [<c042d4b3>] get_signal_to_deliver+0x33/0x397 > [ 116.755016] [<c0403597>] do_notify_resume+0x94/0x6ed > [ 116.755029] [<c0404099>] work_notifysig+0x13/0x1a > [ 116.755044] ======================= > [ 116.755052] irq event stamp: 69 > [ 116.755060] hardirqs last enabled at (69): [<c04040f9>] syscall_exit_work+0x11/0x26 > [ 116.755084] hardirqs last disabled at (68): [<c0403fdd>] syscall_exit+0x9/0x1a > [ 116.755109] softirqs last enabled at (0): [<c042150c>] copy_process+0x4dd/0x1286 > [ 116.755139] softirqs last disabled at (0): [<00000000>] 0x0 > [ 116.945776] done. > > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/2.6.22-rc4/git-dmesg > http://www.stardust.webpages.pl/files/tbf/bitis-gabonica/2.6.22-rc4/git-config Well, it's harmless in the sense that "yeah, the system still works", but it does seem to be a real bug. We have hardware interrupts disabled when we _think_ we should have them on, so our irq tracking is off. Ingo, do you see what's up? It looks like we got a signal to a process that just got created, is the setup stuff for "tsk->hardirqs_enabled" perhaps off a bit? Linus _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
