Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261412AbVBGMxL (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Feb 2005 07:53:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261413AbVBGMxL (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Feb 2005 07:53:11 -0500 Received: from grendel.digitalservice.pl ([217.67.200.140]:27524 "HELO mail.digitalservice.pl") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261412AbVBGMxF (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Feb 2005 07:53:05 -0500 From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" To: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: 2.6.11-rc3-mm1: softlockup and suspend/resume Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 13:53:57 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pavel Machek References: <20050204103350.241a907a.akpm@osdl.org> <200502062015.56458.rjw@sisk.pl> <20050207085728.GA17197@elte.hu> In-Reply-To: <20050207085728.GA17197@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200502071353.57660.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1848 Lines: 52 On Monday, 7 of February 2005 09:57, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > ah, ok. Could you try my patch and add touch_softlockup_watchdog() to > > > the resume code (before interrupts are re-enabled)? > > > > I did: > > > > --- /home/rafael/tmp/kernel/testing/linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm1/kernel/power/swsusp.c 2005-02-05 20:57:03.000000000 +0100 > > +++ linux-2.6.11-rc3-mm1/kernel/power/swsusp.c 2005-02-06 19:07:39.000000000 +0100 > > @@ -871,6 +869,7 @@ > > restore_processor_state(); > > restore_highmem(); > > device_power_up(); > > + touch_softlockup_watchdog(); > > local_irq_enable(); > > return error; > > } > > > > and it still complains, but the call trace is now different: > > could you describe the timings a bit more - how long it takes to do the > resume, and when does the watchdog print out its warning. The warning is printed right after the image is restored (ie somewhere around the local_irq_enable() above, but it goes before the "PM: Image restored successfully." message that is printed as soon as the return is executed). Definitely, less than 1 s passes between the resoring of the image and the warining. BTW, I've also tried to put touch_softlockup_watchdog() before device_power_up(), but it didn't change much. > Is it a single warning only, and once the resume succeeds, the watchdog > doesnt complain anymore, correct? Yes. Greets, Rafael -- - Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here? - That depends a good deal on where you want to get to. -- Lewis Carroll "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/