On Monday, 28 of January 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, 28 of January 2008, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > No, this isn't the WARN_ON(). > > > > > >> this does have the feel of being scheduling related, but are you > > >> absolutely sure about the precise identity of the patch? > > > > > > Actually, not quite. That's why I have verified it and found that another > > > patch is really responsible for the issue, namely: > > > > > > commit 82a1fcb90287052aabfa235e7ffc693ea003fe69 > > > Author: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Date: Fri Jan 25 21:08:02 2008 +0100 > > > > > > softlockup: automatically detect hung TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE tasks > > > > Are you getting a bunch of prints from the softlockup detector in dmesg? > > No, I don't. In fact, I don't get _any_ messages from it whatsoever. > > > I wonder if the detector can detect a long timeout caused by suspend and > > resume and if not is triggering false positives? > > I'm not sure, but the code is supposed to be suspend-aware, IIRC. However, > I'm seeing a similar symptom on poweroff on an SMP x86-64 box, so it may be > more directly related to the CPU hotplug. I'll try to verify that.
As I expected, the delay is also observable when I do: echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online (it's variable, between 3 and 30 seconds). Again, no messages appear in dmesg when this happens. I suspect I'll be able to reproduce it on another x86-64 SMP machine (I'm going to try that later today). Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
