On Saturday 13 March 2010, M. Vefa Bicakci wrote: > Hello, > > As you can guess from the subject, I have noticed that enabling the > KMS feature of the i915 module with any kernel version after 2.6.32.7 > causes memory corruption after one resumes from suspend-to-disk. > > My hardware is a Toshiba Satellite A100, with an Intel graphics card. > I am using an up-to-date version of Debian Sid. Here are the lspci > entries for my graphics card: > > === 8< === > 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller [8086:27a2] (rev 03) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) > 00:02.1 Display controller [0380]: Intel Corporation Mobile 945GM/GMS/GME, 943/940GML Express Integrated Graphics Controller [8086:27a6] (rev 03) > === >8 === > > I have noticed that after upgrading from 2.6.32.7 to 2.6.32.9, I started > to get a lot of segfaults from different programs when I resume from > suspend-to-disk. After searching the Internet for this problem, I have > seen that some other people also had it, and that it wasn't a new problem > either: > > http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=91375 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537494 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13811 > > Even though some people say that they have had this problem for a long time, > I have only noticed it after upgrading to 2.6.32.9. > > After booting with "nomodeset" and confirming that the problem doesn't > happen with that kernel option, I have determined that the problem was > with i915. > > Then I used the following command to bisect the changes that i915 has > seen between 2.6.32.7 and 2.6.32.9: > > git bisect start v2.6.32.9 v2.6.32.7 -- ./drivers/gpu/drm/ > > With each iteration in the bisection, I have tried at least 3 cycles > of suspend-to-disk and resume operations. I saw that all of the tried > versions had memory corruption issues after resume from suspend-to-disk. > > Then, git told me that the culprit is the first change to i915 after the > release 2.6.32.7. So 2.6.32.8 introduced the regression I am experiencing. > Here's the "git bisect log" output: > > === 8< === > # bad: [7f5e918e62cbc9ac27c2f47d3c3dd4b86f67ff0e] Linux 2.6.32.9 > # good: [b4bdd73ce865213a5653dc424873e8da37e858cc] Linux 2.6.32.7 > git bisect start 'v2.6.32.9' 'v2.6.32.7' '--' './drivers/gpu/drm/' > # bad: [192ff23a2206eb5136c779bfed73171a4d214ad6] drm/i915: Add HP nx9020/SamsungSX20S to ACPI LID quirk list > git bisect bad 192ff23a2206eb5136c779bfed73171a4d214ad6 > # bad: [6240058ce3725f5e708e1c17c3a676217e44ba9b] drm/i915: disable hotplug detect before Ironlake CRT detect > git bisect bad 6240058ce3725f5e708e1c17c3a676217e44ba9b > # bad: [61d4374b51386dd40c03fd15df5a7f97347de688] drm/i915: Reload hangcheck timer too for Ironlake > git bisect bad 61d4374b51386dd40c03fd15df5a7f97347de688 > # bad: [d8e0902806c0bd2ccc4f6a267ff52565a3ec933b] drm/i915: Selectively enable self-reclaim > git bisect bad d8e0902806c0bd2ccc4f6a267ff52565a3ec933b > > d8e0902806c0bd2ccc4f6a267ff52565a3ec933b is the first bad commit > commit d8e0902806c0bd2ccc4f6a267ff52565a3ec933b > Author: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed Jan 27 13:36:32 2010 +0000 > > drm/i915: Selectively enable self-reclaim > > commit 4bdadb9785696439c6e2b3efe34aa76df1149c83 upstream. > > Having missed the ENOMEM return via i915_gem_fault(), there are probably > other paths that I also missed. By not enabling NORETRY by default these > paths can run the shrinker and take memory from the system (but not from > our own inactive lists because our shrinker can not run whilst we hold > the struct mutex) and this may allow the system to survive a little longer > whilst our drivers consume all available memory. > > References: > OOM killer unexpectedly called with kernel 2.6.32 > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14933 > > v2: Pass gfp into page mapping. > v3: Use new read_cache_page_gfp() instead of open-coding. > > ... > === >8 === > > For the record, just to confirm that this commit is actually the culprit, > I took a vanilla 2.6.32.9 source tree and reverted only this commit. I am > happy to let you know that with this commit reverted, I can no longer > reproduce the memory corruption issue. > > However, as I noted above, some people have had this problem for a longer > time. So I am not sure if the commit above causes the bug or if it makes > the bug easier to trigger. > > Finally, I would like to note that this regression is going to be important, > because, as you know, Intel's X11 drivers are not going to support mode-setting > in user mode starting with version 2.10.0. > > If there is any help I can provide in fixing this regression, please let me > know. I am willing to try patches. If I remember correctly, this has been fixed in the mainline, but I don't remember the exact commit right now. Chris, Jesse, can you please help? Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
