On 01/08/17 10:43, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 23:07, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
The HPET resume path abuses irq_domain_[de]activate_irq() to restore the
MSI message in the HPET chip for the boot CPU on resume and it relies on an
implementation detail
On 01/08/17 10:43, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 1 Aug 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 23:07, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
The HPET resume path abuses irq_domain_[de]activate_irq() to restore the
MSI message in the HPET chip for the boot CPU on resume and it relies on an
implementation detail
suspend/resume. The restore of the MSI message reestablishes the previous
affinity setting which is the correct one.
Fixes: bf22ff45bed6 ("genirq: Avoid unnecessary low level irq function calls")
Reported-by: Martin Peres <martin.pe...@linux.intel.com>
Reported-by: Tomi Sarv
suspend/resume. The restore of the MSI message reestablishes the previous
affinity setting which is the correct one.
Fixes: bf22ff45bed6 ("genirq: Avoid unnecessary low level irq function calls")
Reported-by: Martin Peres
Reported-by: Tomi Sarvela
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner
Cc: jeffy
On 31/07/17 18:06, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check
On 31/07/17 18:06, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check
On 31/07/17 17:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 11:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 31/07/17 17:04, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 11:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 31/07/17 11:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check
On 31/07/17 11:29, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check that the problem persisted in linus-HEAD before testing your
patch. The testing was done
On 31/07/17 10:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Did you change anything else compared to the tests before ?
I did check that the problem persisted in linus-HEAD before testing your
patch. The testing was done
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 28/07/17 19:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 28/07/17 17:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Another question. Is the machine completely dead or not?
Completely dead. Powerled
On 28/07/17 17:50, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Another question. Is the machine completely dead or not?
Completely dead. Powerled
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Another question. Is the machine completely dead or not?
Completely dead. Powerled is on, so host isn't shut down.
So that means it does not even power the machine
On 28/07/17 17:13, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Another question. Is the machine completely dead or not?
Completely dead. Powerled is on, so host isn't shut down.
So that means it does not even power the machine
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 00:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
The patch didn't apply cleanly: can you tell exact commit or tag it has been
created against?
Linus head
I tried to hand
On 28/07/17 16:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 28/07/17 00:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
The patch didn't apply cleanly: can you tell exact commit or tag it has been
created against?
Linus head
I tried to hand
On 28/07/17 00:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 27/07/17 10:42, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner
On 28/07/17 00:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 27/07/17 10:42, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner
On 27/07/17 10:42, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
So reverting that commit does not help. Does it help on your machine?
Yes. Reverting it does not cause the machine to lock up on resume.
I haven't tested
On 27/07/17 10:42, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
So reverting that commit does not help. Does it help on your machine?
Yes. Reverting it does not cause the machine to lock up on resume.
I haven't tested
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 25/07/17 10:01, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:37, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 18:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 26/07/17 17:26, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 25/07/17 10:01, Tomi Sarvela wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:37, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 18:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote
On 24/07/17 19:37, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 18:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Output of 'cat /proc/interrupts' and a description what kind of
'old' Intel
platform that is.
Sorry, I should have repeated
On 24/07/17 19:37, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 19:35, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017, Martin Peres wrote:
On 24/07/17 18:28, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Output of 'cat /proc/interrupts' and a description what kind of
'old' Intel
platform that is.
Sorry, I should have repeated
Alexander Usyskin <alexander.usys...@intel.com>
Date: Thu Nov 10 18:38:57 2016 +0200
mei: send OS type to the FW
If there's something I can do to track this bug down, the hosts are
usually available for testing.
Best regards,
Tomi Sarvela
--
Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 -
Alexander Usyskin
Date: Thu Nov 10 18:38:57 2016 +0200
mei: send OS type to the FW
If there's something I can do to track this bug down, the hosts are
usually available for testing.
Best regards,
Tomi Sarvela
--
Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
instead of /dev/sda1). If two disks
show the request queue overflow, both ID's give same errors.
If there's ideas/patches what I could try, please CC,
I can only read lkml when I have time, the traffic is
too heavy for my mailbox.
TIA,
Tomi Sarvela
instead of /dev/sda1). If two disks
show the request queue overflow, both ID's give same errors.
If there's ideas/patches what I could try, please CC,
I can only read lkml when I have time, the traffic is
too heavy for my mailbox.
TIA,
Tomi Sarvela
32 matches
Mail list logo
