Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Jan 2009 01:52:02 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [Bug 12492] Re: [patch 1/2] stop_machine: introduce stop_machine_create/destroy. |
| |
On Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:04:32 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:36:30 +0100 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > Introduce stop_machine_create/destroy. With this interface subsystems > > that need a non-failing stop_machine environment can create the > > stop_machine machine threads before actually calling stop_machine. > > When the threads aren't needed anymore they can be killed with > > stop_machine_destroy again. > > > > When stop_machine gets called and the threads aren't present they > > will be created and destroyed automatically. This restores the old > > behaviour of stop_machine. > > > > This patch also converts cpu hotplug to the new interface since it > > is special: cpu_down calls __stop_machine instead of stop_machine. > > However the kstop threads will only be created when stop_machine > > gets called. > > > > Changing the code so that the threads would be created automatically > > on __stop_machine is currently not possible: when __stop_machine gets > > called we hold cpu_add_remove_lock, which is the same lock that > > create_rt_workqueue would take. So the workqueue needs to be created > > before the cpu hotplug code locks cpu_add_remove_lock. > > In http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12492, Thomas (cc'ed > here) reports > > Commit 9ea09af3bd3090e8349ca2899ca2011bd94cda85 introduced a > regression that caused the kernel to fail to suspend. The 'sleeping' > LED on the laptop just keeps blinking and the laptop never shuts > down. I think this was eventually fixed because with 2.6.29-rc1 and > -rc2 the laptop suspends fine, but fails to resume. When I try to > resume, all I see is a blinking cursor in the top left corner of the > screen. > > I'm using acpi_sleep=s3_bios,s3_mode, suspending using a script > that does: echo mem > /sys/power/state. >
hm. Re-reading this, it seems to be saying that 9ea09af3bd3090e8349ca2899ca2011bd94cda85 might be innocent, and that some other patch might have caused the resume regression?
| |