Hi!
> > > It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> > > return statement. Any theories there?
> >
> > Only stack or memory corruption come into mind, but I have no clue how
> > this is related to the resume logic changes.
>
> So I had the brilliant idea of
Hi!
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
Only stack or memory corruption come into mind, but I have no clue how
this is related to the resume logic changes.
So I had the brilliant idea of turning on some
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 23:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:50 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
> > >
> > > It's peculiar that the hang happens when
On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:50 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
> >
> > It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> > return statement. Any theories
On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:50 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 23:42 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:12:50 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
It's peculiar that the hang happens when
On Sun, 13 May 2007 22:07:39 +0200 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I expect quite a few people will start seeing that. iirc it was
> > triggered by a couple of changes: a local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
> > in sched_clock()
* Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, I expect quite a few people will start seeing that. iirc it was
> triggered by a couple of changes: a local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
> in sched_clock() and a change Jeremy made to the softlockup detector.
hm, i specifically asked to not do
On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:48:07 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > Can you send me your .config please ?
> > > >
> > >
> > > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
> >
> > No luck.
>
> I'm making
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Can you send me your .config please ?
> > >
> >
> > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
>
> No luck.
I'm making progress. After fiddling with the config options I get a
solid lockup of netconsole during boot :(
But
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
>
> It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> return statement. Any theories there?
I assume you have a printk right before the return and one after the
call to
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 18:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 21:56:10 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > The broken-out queue should turn up at
> > >
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 18:11 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2007 21:56:10 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The broken-out queue should turn up at
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/mm/
in
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
I assume you have a printk right before the return and one after the
call to
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Can you send me your .config please ?
http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
No luck.
I'm making progress. After fiddling with the config options I get a
solid lockup of netconsole during boot :(
But also lockdep
On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:48:07 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2007-05-13 at 10:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
Can you send me your .config please ?
http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/config-sony.txt
No luck.
I'm making progress. After fiddling with
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I expect quite a few people will start seeing that. iirc it was
triggered by a couple of changes: a local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
in sched_clock() and a change Jeremy made to the softlockup detector.
hm, i specifically asked to not do
On Sun, 13 May 2007 22:07:39 +0200 Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I expect quite a few people will start seeing that. iirc it was
triggered by a couple of changes: a local_irq_save/local_irq_restore
in sched_clock() and a change
On Sat, 12 May 2007 21:56:10 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The broken-out queue should turn up at
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/mm/
> > in a few minutes.
>
> Sigh. I can't reproduce your
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> The broken-out queue should turn up at
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/mm/
> in a few minutes.
Sigh. I can't reproduce your lockdep problem :(
Can you send me your .config please ?
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 19:01:41 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can you upload a snapshot of your current queue ?
>
> Yeah, that's super-easy. It just happens that it all compiles
> and runs at present ;)
Really ?
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 19:01 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 09:51 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > The locking in clocksource_resume_watchdog looks pretty pointless anyway.
> > Can't we just delete it?
> >
> > The only thing it can race against is, conceivably,
> >
> >
On Sat, 12 May 2007 19:01:41 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can you upload a snapshot of your current queue ?
Yeah, that's super-easy. It just happens that it all compiles
and runs at present ;)
The single-big-patch is at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/tg.bz2
The
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 09:51 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> The locking in clocksource_resume_watchdog looks pretty pointless anyway.
> Can't we just delete it?
>
> The only thing it can race against is, conceivably,
>
> resumed = watchdog_resumed;
> if (unlikely(resumed))
>
On Sat, 12 May 2007 13:44:13 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> lockdep complains about the lock nesting of clocksource and watchdog
> lock in the resume path. Move watchdog resume out of the clocksource
> lock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Index:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 03:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> > > return statement. Any theories there?
> >
> > Only stack or memory
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 03:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> > > return statement. Any theories there?
> >
> > Only stack or memory
On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
> > return statement. Any theories there?
>
> Only stack or memory corruption come into mind, but I have no clue how
> this is related to
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
I did not really expect that it fixes the problem. It just restored the
local APIC suspend/resume register fiddling which we had before the
resume logic patch.
> It's peculiar that the hang
On Sat, 12 May 2007 10:46:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 23:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 23:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > > >
> > > > hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an RPM which contains acpidump
> > > > and
> > > > all the yum servers are featuring scrogged
On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > >
> > > hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an RPM which contains acpidump
> > > and
> > > all the yum servers are featuring scrogged checksums. I could build it, I
> > > guess, but there's a principle
On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an RPM which contains acpidump
and
all the yum servers are featuring scrogged checksums. I could build it, I
guess, but there's a principle involved ;)
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 23:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an RPM which contains acpidump
and
all the yum servers are featuring scrogged checksums. I could
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 02:00 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
Still hangs in the same fashion, sorry.
I did not really expect that it fixes the problem. It just restored the
local APIC suspend/resume register fiddling which we had before the
resume logic patch.
It's peculiar that the hang happens
On Sat, 12 May 2007 10:46:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 23:56 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2007 23:09:15 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
hm, Fedora don't seem to want to give me an RPM which contains
On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
Only stack or memory corruption come into mind, but I have no clue how
this is related to the resume
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 03:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
Only stack or memory corruption come
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 03:07 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2007 11:18:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's peculiar that the hang happens when acpi_evaluate_object() hits its
return statement. Any theories there?
Only stack or memory corruption come
On Sat, 12 May 2007 13:44:13 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lockdep complains about the lock nesting of clocksource and watchdog
lock in the resume path. Move watchdog resume out of the clocksource
lock.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 09:51 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The locking in clocksource_resume_watchdog looks pretty pointless anyway.
Can't we just delete it?
The only thing it can race against is, conceivably,
resumed = watchdog_resumed;
if (unlikely(resumed))
On Sat, 12 May 2007 19:01:41 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you upload a snapshot of your current queue ?
Yeah, that's super-easy. It just happens that it all compiles
and runs at present ;)
The single-big-patch is at http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/tg.bz2
The broken-out
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 19:01 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 09:51 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The locking in clocksource_resume_watchdog looks pretty pointless anyway.
Can't we just delete it?
The only thing it can race against is, conceivably,
resumed =
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Sat, 12 May 2007 19:01:41 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you upload a snapshot of your current queue ?
Yeah, that's super-easy. It just happens that it all compiles
and runs at present ;)
Really ?
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The broken-out queue should turn up at
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/mm/
in a few minutes.
Sigh. I can't reproduce your lockdep problem :(
Can you send me your .config please ?
tglx
-
To unsubscribe from
On Sat, 12 May 2007 21:56:10 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2007-05-12 at 10:23 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
The broken-out queue should turn up at
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/mm/
in a few minutes.
Sigh. I can't reproduce your lockdep problem
On Friday, 11 May 2007 23:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, 11 May 2007 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
> > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
> > > > >
On Friday, 11 May 2007 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
> > > > ===
> > > > ---
On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
> > > ===
> > > --- linux-2.6.21.orig/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
> > > +++
On Friday, 11 May 2007 18:47, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:07 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > > > If that patch makes
On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:07 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > > If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
> > > > > > good
On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:07 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
good hint what we need
On Friday, 11 May 2007 18:47, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:12:07 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
If that patch makes the problem go away,
On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
===
--- linux-2.6.21.orig/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
+++
On Friday, 11 May 2007 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
===
---
On Friday, 11 May 2007 23:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, 11 May 2007 22:28, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:10:24 +0200
Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Index: linux-2.6.21/drivers/acpi/hardware/hwsleep.c
On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
> > > > > good hint what we need to look at.
> > > >
> > > > No joy, sorry. It still hangs at the last
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
> > > > good hint what we need to look at.
> > >
> > > No joy, sorry. It still hangs at the last statement in
> > > acpi_evaluate_object().
> >
> > Can you add
On Thu, 10 May 2007 10:55:45 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 01:46 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andrew,
> > >
> > > can you test the alternative replacement
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 01:46 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > can you test the alternative replacement patch for
> >
> > clockevents: Fix resume logic - updated version
> >
> > It does not touch
On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> can you test the alternative replacement patch for
>
> clockevents: Fix resume logic - updated version
>
> It does not touch the interrupt controller, it does the PIT restart
> different. That's a
On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
can you test the alternative replacement patch for
clockevents: Fix resume logic - updated version
It does not touch the interrupt controller, it does the PIT restart
different. That's a patch from
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 01:46 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
can you test the alternative replacement patch for
clockevents: Fix resume logic - updated version
It does not touch the interrupt
On Thu, 10 May 2007 10:55:45 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 01:46 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 23:26:22 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Andrew,
can you test the alternative replacement patch for
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
good hint what we need to look at.
No joy, sorry. It still hangs at the last statement in
acpi_evaluate_object().
Can you add nolapic_timer to the
On Thursday, 10 May 2007 11:27, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Thu, 2007-05-10 at 02:18 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
If that patch makes the problem go away, then we should have a quite
good hint what we need to look at.
No joy, sorry. It still hangs at the last statement in
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 22:53 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 22:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 20:36 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Well, apparently, not in -mm2:
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/mm/linux-2.6.21-mm2> grep -r -I -l
> > >
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 22:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 20:36 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Well, apparently, not in -mm2:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/mm/linux-2.6.21-mm2> grep -r -I -l
> > 'timekeeping_resume' *
> > kernel/time/timekeeping.c
> > [EMAIL
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 20:36 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Well, apparently, not in -mm2:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/mm/linux-2.6.21-mm2> grep -r -I -l
> 'timekeeping_resume' *
> kernel/time/timekeeping.c
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/src/mm/linux-2.6.21-mm2> grep clocksource_resume
>
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 19:14, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2007 14:52:07 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > > Andrew, could you please apply the appended patch and see if that
> > > helps (should apply to -mm2)?
> >
> > Argh, sorry. This needs yet another
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 19:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:09 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > Well, where is unregister_time_interpolator() called from?
> > >
> > > # grep -rn unregister_time_interpolator .
> > >
On Wed, 9 May 2007 14:52:07 +0200 "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Andrew, could you please apply the appended patch and see if that
> > helps (should apply to -mm2)?
>
> Argh, sorry. This needs yet another patch (sent for review to linux-pm) to
> be applied. The following
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:09 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > Well, where is unregister_time_interpolator() called from?
> >
> > # grep -rn unregister_time_interpolator .
> > ./kernel/timer.c:1893:unregister_time_interpolator(struct time_interpolator
> > *ti)
> >
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 15:19, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 15:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 15:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday.
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 13:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
> > > > these patches against 2.6.21.
> > >
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
> > > > these patches against 2.6.21.
> >
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
> > > these patches against 2.6.21.
> >
> > yup, same hang with just these three:
> >
> > origin
> >
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
> > these patches against 2.6.21.
>
> yup, same hang with just these three:
>
> origin
> clocksource-fix-resume-logic
> clockevents-fix-resume-logic-updated-version
On Wed, 9 May 2007 01:22:57 -0700 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 09 May 2007 10:18:17 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > > find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
> > > > >
On Wed, 09 May 2007 10:18:17 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > > find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
> > > > VAIO-of-fun-emulator and I got confirmation from several other affected
> > > >
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
> > > VAIO-of-fun-emulator and I got confirmation from several other affected
> > > users, that the patch series is still solving their problems.
> > >
> >
> > The machine is
On Tue, 8 May 2007 22:59:20 -0700 Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 06 May 2007 17:03:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 13:51 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
On Sun, 06 May 2007 17:03:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew,
>
> On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 13:51 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Fixup the existing users.
> > >
> > > This one makes the Vaio-of-fun hang during suspend
On Sun, 06 May 2007 17:03:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 13:51 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fixup the existing users.
This one makes the Vaio-of-fun hang during suspend to disk. It gets
On Tue, 8 May 2007 22:59:20 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 06 May 2007 17:03:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew,
On Sat, 2007-05-05 at 13:51 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fixup the existing
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
VAIO-of-fun-emulator and I got confirmation from several other affected
users, that the patch series is still solving their problems.
The machine is still hanging
On Wed, 09 May 2007 10:18:17 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
VAIO-of-fun-emulator and I got confirmation from several other affected
users, that the
On Wed, 9 May 2007 01:22:57 -0700 Andrew Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 09 May 2007 10:18:17 +0200 Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 00:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
find an updated patch below. It fixes the problem on Ingo's
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
these patches against 2.6.21.
yup, same hang with just these three:
origin
clocksource-fix-resume-logic
clockevents-fix-resume-logic-updated-version
I have
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
these patches against 2.6.21.
yup, same hang with just these three:
origin
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
these patches against 2.6.21.
yup,
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 13:45, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me recheck just
these patches against 2.6.21.
yup, same
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
I suspect I just tested the wrong thing yesterday. Let me
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 15:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 01:31 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 15:19, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 15:12 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 14:24, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 13:45 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 10:59, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:09 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, where is unregister_time_interpolator() called from?
# grep -rn unregister_time_interpolator .
./kernel/timer.c:1893:unregister_time_interpolator(struct time_interpolator
*ti)
./include/linux/timex.h:270:extern void
On Wed, 9 May 2007 14:52:07 +0200 Rafael J. Wysocki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew, could you please apply the appended patch and see if that
helps (should apply to -mm2)?
Argh, sorry. This needs yet another patch (sent for review to linux-pm) to
be applied. The following one is
On Wednesday, 9 May 2007 19:15, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 19:09 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
Well, where is unregister_time_interpolator() called from?
# grep -rn unregister_time_interpolator .
./kernel/timer.c:1893:unregister_time_interpolator(struct
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
