Hi, On 2/17/24 09:13, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > [/me among others adds Shyam (author of the culprit) and Hans (committed > it) to the list of recipients] > > For the newly joined, this thread starts here: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/ed2226ff-257b-4cfd-afd6-bf3be9785474@localhost/ Thanks (1) Trolli, there are 2 PMF fixes pending for 6.8, one of which is suspend-resume related: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/platform-driver-x86/patch/20240216064112.962582-1-Shyam-sundar.S-k@xxxxxxx/ https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/platform-driver-x86/patch/20240216064112.962582-2-Shyam-sundar.S-k@xxxxxxx/ I plan to merge these and send them in their way to Linus next week. Can you build a 6.8-c4 with those 2 included and see if that fixes things ? You can download mbox files from patchwork and then do "git am <file>" to apply them. Regards, Hans 1) Note I'm subscribed to the regressions list so I was already following this. > On 17.02.24 00:26, Trolli Schmittlauch wrote: >>>> Still, I had the time to bisect the vanilla kernel and landed at >>>> 7c45534afa4435c9fceeeb8ca33c0fdc269c2240 as the first bad commit. > > Reminder, that's 7c45534afa4435 ("platform/x86/amd/pmf: Add support for > PMF Policy Binary") [v6.8-rc1] > >>>> Could be a red herring though[] >>> If this turns out to be accurate, it's actually quite interesting. >>> You can prove it's accurate by doing a module blacklist for the >>> amd-pmf driver (even on 6.8-rc4+). >>> >>> If that works, it's a great hint at the problem scope and we need to >>> pull Shyam into the conversation. >> I just checked this with Linux version 6.8.0-rc4 (nixbld@localhost) (gcc >> (GCC) 12.3.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.40) #1-NixOS SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC >> Sun Feb 11 20:18:13 UTC 2024. >> >> Blacklisting the "amd-pmf" module indeed resolves the issue, good catch. >> I've attached to s2idle logs of 4 successful cycles without amd-pmf. To >> be honest, I don't know why the script considers the kernel to be >> tainted. I have compiled the kernel via the NixOS packaging >> infrastracture though without checking whether the distro applies any >> patches, but a guix user had also confirmed the issue in the Framework >> forum so I guess this issue is vanilla enough. >> >> Looking forward to resolving this. I guess for most use cases I can just >> keep the module blacklisted for now? > > Ciao, Thorsten > > P.S.: To be sure the issue doesn't fall through the cracks unnoticed, > I'm adding it to regzbot, the Linux kernel regression tracking bot: > > #regzbot introduced 7c45534afa4435 / > #regzbot title platform/x86/amd/pmf: system freezes after resuming from > suspend > #regzbot ignore-activity >
