Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-06 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 09:50:47, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> > trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> 
> On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.

I bisected networking breakage to

c16add24522547bf52c189b3c0d1ab6f5c2b4375

which is slightly weird. But it modifies ACPI in strange way, so maybe
not that weird.

Networking breakage is still in next-20180406.

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-06 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 09:50:47, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> > trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> 
> On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.

I bisected networking breakage to

c16add24522547bf52c189b3c0d1ab6f5c2b4375

which is slightly weird. But it modifies ACPI in strange way, so maybe
not that weird.

Networking breakage is still in next-20180406.

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki 
On Thursday, April 5, 2018 10:30:45 PM CEST Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> > > parent of next-20180307.
> > > 
> > > But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> > > should work.
> > > 
> > > Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?
> > 
> > Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
> > do work.
> > 
> > Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.
> > 
> > Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
> > does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..
> > 
> > [   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
> > [   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
> > [   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
> > refusing to freeze, wq_busy
> > =0):
> > [   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
> > [   55.060576] Call Trace:
> > [   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
> > [   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
> > [   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
> > [   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
> > [   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> > [   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> > [   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> > [   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> > 
> > Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?
> 
> Hmm, so I did git bisect, and it pointed to:
> 
> commit 7cb03edf112fea6ead2fcd3c5fd639756d6d114b
> Author: Matthew Wilcox 
> Date:   Thu Mar 29 10:15:17 2018 +1100
> 
> autofs4: use wait_event_killable
> 
> This playing with signals to allow only fatal signals appears to
> predate
> the introduction of wait_event_killable(), and I'm fairly sure
> that
> wait_event_killable is what was meant to happen here.
> 
> Link:
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180319191609.23880-1-wi...@infradead.org
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox 
>   Acked-by: Ian Kent 
>   Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell 

Well, let's tell Thorsten about this (CCed).

Re: update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki 
On Thursday, April 5, 2018 10:30:45 PM CEST Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > > Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> > > parent of next-20180307.
> > > 
> > > But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> > > should work.
> > > 
> > > Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?
> > 
> > Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
> > do work.
> > 
> > Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.
> > 
> > Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
> > does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..
> > 
> > [   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
> > [   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
> > [   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
> > refusing to freeze, wq_busy
> > =0):
> > [   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
> > [   55.060576] Call Trace:
> > [   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
> > [   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
> > [   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
> > [   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
> > [   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> > [   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> > [   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> > [   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> > 
> > Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?
> 
> Hmm, so I did git bisect, and it pointed to:
> 
> commit 7cb03edf112fea6ead2fcd3c5fd639756d6d114b
> Author: Matthew Wilcox 
> Date:   Thu Mar 29 10:15:17 2018 +1100
> 
> autofs4: use wait_event_killable
> 
> This playing with signals to allow only fatal signals appears to
> predate
> the introduction of wait_event_killable(), and I'm fairly sure
> that
> wait_event_killable is what was meant to happen here.
> 
> Link:
> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180319191609.23880-1-wi...@infradead.org
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox 
>   Acked-by: Ian Kent 
>   Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell 

Well, let's tell Thorsten about this (CCed).

Re: update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek 
Hi!

> > Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> > parent of next-20180307.
> > 
> > But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> > should work.
> > 
> > Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?
> 
> Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
> do work.
> 
> Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.
> 
> Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
> does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..
> 
> [   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
> [   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
> [   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
> refusing to freeze, wq_busy
> =0):
> [   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
> [   55.060576] Call Trace:
> [   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
> [   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
> [   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
> [   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
> [   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> [   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> [   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> [   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> 
> Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?

Hmm, so I did git bisect, and it pointed to:

commit 7cb03edf112fea6ead2fcd3c5fd639756d6d114b
Author: Matthew Wilcox 
Date:   Thu Mar 29 10:15:17 2018 +1100

autofs4: use wait_event_killable

This playing with signals to allow only fatal signals appears to
predate
the introduction of wait_event_killable(), and I'm fairly sure
that
wait_event_killable is what was meant to happen here.

Link:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180319191609.23880-1-wi...@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox 
Acked-by: Ian Kent 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell 




-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek 
Hi!

> > Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> > parent of next-20180307.
> > 
> > But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> > should work.
> > 
> > Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?
> 
> Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
> do work.
> 
> Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.
> 
> Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
> does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..
> 
> [   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
> [   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
> [   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
> refusing to freeze, wq_busy
> =0):
> [   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
> [   55.060576] Call Trace:
> [   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
> [   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
> [   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
> [   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
> [   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> [   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
> [   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> [   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
> 
> Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?

Hmm, so I did git bisect, and it pointed to:

commit 7cb03edf112fea6ead2fcd3c5fd639756d6d114b
Author: Matthew Wilcox 
Date:   Thu Mar 29 10:15:17 2018 +1100

autofs4: use wait_event_killable

This playing with signals to allow only fatal signals appears to
predate
the introduction of wait_event_killable(), and I'm fairly sure
that
wait_event_killable is what was meant to happen here.

Link:
http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180319191609.23880-1-wi...@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox 
Acked-by: Ian Kent 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton

Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell 




-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 10:49:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2018-04-04 09:58:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > >> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> > >> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> > >
> > > On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> > > version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
> > >
> > > Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?
> > 
> > Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?
> 
> Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> parent of next-20180307.
> 
> But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> should work.
> 
> Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?

Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
do work.

Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.

Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..

[   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
[   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
[   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
refusing to freeze, wq_busy
=0):
[   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
[   55.060576] Call Trace:
[   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
[   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
[   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
[   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
[   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
[   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
[   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
[   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200

Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?


Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

update-binfmts breaking suspend was Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-05 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 10:49:05, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Wed 2018-04-04 09:58:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > >> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> > >> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> > >
> > > On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> > > version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
> > >
> > > Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?
> > 
> > Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?
> 
> Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
> parent of next-20180307.
> 
> But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
> should work.
> 
> Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?

Hmm. I tested on T40p. That works ok, so at least some 32bit machines
do work.

Hmm, and my test scripts were wrong.

Failure is not a hang, as they expect, but... machine locks up, but
does not suspend, and then continues running after a delay..

[   35.038766] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
[   35.051246] Freezing user space processes ...
[   55.060528] Freezing of tasks failed after 20.009 seconds (1 tasks
refusing to freeze, wq_busy
=0):
[   55.060552] update-binfmts  D0  2727  1 0x8004
[   55.060576] Call Trace:
[   55.060600]  __schedule+0x37a/0x7e0
[   55.060618]  schedule+0x29/0x70
[   55.060635]  autofs4_wait+0x359/0x7a0
[   55.060653]  ? wait_woken+0x70/0x70
[   55.060668]  autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
[   55.060684]  ? autofs4_mount_wait+0x4a/0xe0
[   55.060699]  autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200
[   55.060715]  ? autofs4_d_automount+0xe0/0x200

Did the rework of freezing start already in -next?


Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 09:58:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> >> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> >
> > On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> > version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
> >
> > Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?
> 
> Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?

Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
parent of next-20180307.

But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
should work.

Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?

Best regards,
Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Pavel Machek 
On Wed 2018-04-04 09:58:17, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> >> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
> >
> > On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> > version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
> >
> > Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?
> 
> Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?

Well, v4.16-rc4 is parent of v4.16-rc6, but next-20180304 is not
parent of next-20180307.

But you are right that if I do bisect between -linus and -next, it
should work.

Anyway, does s2ram work for you in -next? Are you testing 32bit?

Best regards,
Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki 
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
>> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
>
> On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
>
> Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?

Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?

Re: x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Rafael J. Wysocki 
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM, Pavel Machek  wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
>> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.
>
> On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
> version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.
>
> Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?

Well, why would it be different from a bisect on any other git repo?

x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Pavel Machek 
Hi!

> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.

On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.

Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

x32 suspend failuer in Re: linux-next: Tree for Apr 4

2018-04-04 Thread Pavel Machek 
Hi!

> Please do not add any v4.18 destined stuff to your linux-next included
> trees until after v4.17-rc1 has been released.

On thinkpad x60, suspend does not suspend at all with this -next
version. Previous versions suspended/resumed fine but broke networking.

Any ideas? I guess bisecting on next would not be easy?

Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature