Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751991AbZL2Tvc (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:51:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751727AbZL2Tva (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:51:30 -0500 Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.1]:62046 "EHLO vms173001pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751710AbZL2Tv3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:51:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2009 14:51:11 -0500 (EST) From: Len Brown X-X-Sender: lenb@localhost.localdomain To: Stephen Hemminger Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: ACPI warning from alloc_pages_nodemask on boot (2.6.33 regression) In-reply-to: <20091229094202.25818e9b@nehalam> Message-id: References: <20091229094202.25818e9b@nehalam> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 5820 Lines: 105 On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > Running 2.6.33-rc2 shows new warning during boot. > This is Asus P6T board with i7 CPU (920). I have DMA > debug and lockdep turned on in config so more checking than > usual. > > > [ 1.548537] Total of 8 processors activated (42764.23 BogoMIPS). > [ 1.553064] regulator: core version 0.5 > [ 1.553090] Time: 17:21:29 Date: 12/29/09 > [ 1.553243] NET: Registered protocol family 16 > [ 1.553613] ACPI: bus type pci registered > [ 1.553733] PCI: MMCONFIG for domain 0000 [bus 00-ff] at [mem 0xe0000000-0xefffffff] (base 0xe0000000) > [ 1.553736] PCI: not using MMCONFIG > [ 1.553738] PCI: Using configuration type 1 for base access > [ 1.555326] bio: create slab at 0 > [ 1.562336] ACPI: EC: Look up EC in DSDT > [ 1.573083] ACPI: Executed 1 blocks of module-level executable AML code Could be an issue with the new module-level Windows compatibility feature. > [ 1.611664] ACPI Warning: Incorrect checksum in table [OEMB] - 94, should be 8C (20091214/tbutils-314) > [ 1.611698] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf7980c0 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P001Ist 00000011 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.613966] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf7984d0 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P002Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.616242] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf7988e0 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P003Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.618526] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf798cf0 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P004Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.620817] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf799100 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P005Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.623112] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf799510 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P006Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.625409] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf799920 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P007Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.627734] ACPI: SSDT 00000000bf799d30 00403 (v01 DpgPmm P008Ist 00000012 INTL 20060113) > [ 1.630020] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [ 1.630026] WARNING: at mm/page_alloc.c:1812 __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x617/0x730() if (order >= MAX_ORDER) { WARN_ON_ONCE(!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN)); return NULL; } I don't know what the mm alloc code is complaining about here. > [ 1.630028] Hardware name: System Product Name > [ 1.630029] Modules linked in: > [ 1.630032] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.33-rc2 #4 > [ 1.630034] Call Trace: > [ 1.630038] [] warn_slowpath_common+0x78/0xb0 > [ 1.630041] [] warn_slowpath_null+0xf/0x20 > [ 1.630044] [] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x617/0x730 > [ 1.630048] [] alloc_page_interleave+0x34/0x90 > [ 1.630050] [] alloc_pages_current+0xc4/0xd0 > [ 1.630053] [] __get_free_pages+0x9/0x50 > [ 1.630055] [] __kmalloc+0x1bb/0x1f0 > [ 1.630059] [] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0xd/0x10 > [ 1.630064] [] acpi_os_allocate+0x25/0x27 > [ 1.630067] [] acpi_ex_load_op+0xd8/0x260 > [ 1.630070] [] acpi_ex_opcode_1A_1T_0R+0x25/0x4b > [ 1.630073] [] acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0xea/0x3d6 > [ 1.630076] [] acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x7d9/0x95f > [ 1.630079] [] ? acpi_ds_call_control_method+0x166/0x1d7 > [ 1.630082] [] acpi_ps_parse_aml+0x9a/0x2b9 > [ 1.630085] [] acpi_ps_execute_method+0x1c8/0x29a > [ 1.630088] [] acpi_ns_evaluate+0xe1/0x1a8 > [ 1.630090] [] acpi_evaluate_object+0xf9/0x1f2 > [ 1.630094] [] acpi_processor_set_pdc+0x1be/0x1e8 > [ 1.630097] [] early_init_pdc+0x9/0xf > [ 1.630100] [] acpi_ns_walk_namespace+0xb9/0x187 > [ 1.630102] [] ? early_init_pdc+0x0/0xf > [ 1.630105] [] ? early_init_pdc+0x0/0xf > [ 1.630108] [] acpi_walk_namespace+0x85/0xbf > [ 1.630111] [] ? acpi_init+0x0/0x12f > [ 1.630113] [] ? acpi_init+0x0/0x12f > [ 1.630116] [] acpi_early_processor_set_pdc+0x3a/0x3c > [ 1.630119] [] acpi_bus_init+0xb5/0x1de > [ 1.630123] [] ? kobject_create_and_add+0x3e/0x80 > [ 1.630126] [] ? genhd_device_init+0x0/0x7b > [ 1.630128] [] ? acpi_init+0x0/0x12f > [ 1.630131] [] acpi_init+0x71/0x12f > [ 1.630134] [] do_one_initcall+0x37/0x1a0 > [ 1.630137] [] kernel_init+0x166/0x1bc > [ 1.630140] [] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 > [ 1.630144] [] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30 > [ 1.630147] [] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1bc > [ 1.630149] [] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10 > [ 1.630156] ---[ end trace f17e946d22a56015 ]--- > [ 1.630159] ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed [\_PR_.P009._OSC] (Node ffff8801b9069c20), AE_NO_MEMORY > [ 1.630196] ACPI Error (psparse-0537): Method parse/execution failed [\_PR_.P009._PDC] (Node ffff8801b9069c00), AE_NO_MEMORY We've changed both the _OSC and _PDC code in this release. In particular, _PDC is being evaluated earler than last release in an attempt to be more Windows compatible... Stephen, Please attach the output from acpidump to a new bugzilla entry and point this thread to it. thanks, Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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/