Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755421AbcCNIv2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2016 04:51:28 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:45562 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755228AbcCNIvT (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2016 04:51:19 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 09:49:52 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Clark Williams cc: Daniel Wagner , Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , RT , LKML Subject: Re: [RT] Warning from swake_up_all_locked in rt-4.4.4-rt11 In-Reply-To: <20160313225358.4eb9316a@sluggy.hsv.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <20160313225358.4eb9316a@sluggy.hsv.redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1378 Lines: 33 On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Clark Williams wrote: > I'm hitting the WARN_ON(wakes > 2) in $SUBJECT when resuming from suspend on my laptop (quad-core i7 with HT on). Looks like the warning gets hit 36 times on resume. E.g.: > > Call Trace: > [] dump_stack+0x65/0x85 > [] warn_slowpath_common+0x82/0xd0 > [] warn_slowpath_null+0x1a/0x20 > [] swake_up_all_locked+0x68/0x80 > [] complete_all+0x30/0x50 > [] device_resume_noirq+0x48/0x190 > [] async_resume_noirq+0x1d/0x50 > [] async_run_entry_fn+0x48/0x130 > [] process_one_work+0x139/0x480 > [] worker_thread+0x57/0x490 > [] ? process_one_work+0x480/0x480 > [] kthread+0xed/0x110 > [] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x150/0x150 > ehci-pci 0000:00:1a.0: System wakeup disabled by ACPI > [] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70 > [] ? kthread_worker_fn+0x150/0x150 > ---[ end trace 0000000000000002 ]--- > > This trace (and a similar one with device_resume) happens on all cpus so the > trace info is kinda jumbled up. I'll try it with WARN_ON_ONCE instead > tomorrow. If resume is the only case, then we can filter that out and not worry about it at all :) Thanks, tglx