Re: [possible regression] 2.6.22 reiserfs/libata sporadically hangs on resume from hibernation

["Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>]

On Saturday, 30 June 2007 06:59, Andrey Borzenkov wrote:
> Since 2.6.18 I do not have suspend to RAM; now I am starting to lose suspend 
> to disk :)
> 
> Environment - vanilla kernel (2.6.22-rc6 currently + squashfs + single 
> pata_ali patch to switch off DMA on CD-ROM), single root on reiserfs, libata 
> with pata_ali driver.
> 
> Until 2.6.22-rc I never had problems with hibernation. With 2.6.22-rc system 
> hung at least once in every rcX. Up to rc6 those lockups were absolutely 
> silent (black screen without reaction to any key). In rc6 I just got 
> something different. After resume I got on screem:
> 
> swsusp: Marking nosave pages: 000000000009f000-0000000000100000
> swsusp: Basic memory bitmaps created
> swsusp: Basic memory bitmaps freed
> 
> After that it just sits there doing nothing. Ther was brief sound of HDD but I 
> suspect it was related more to power-on. System was responding to power-on 
> button press:
> 
> ACPI Error (event-0305): No installed handler for fixed event [00000002 
> 20070125]
> 
> And SysRq was functioning.

That probably means that there's a deadlock somewhere in there.

> Unfortunately I do not have serial console so I  
> copy manually stacks from several last screens of output; I have tried to 
> make a photo but right now my kbluetooth is refusing to work at all so I 
> cannot transfer them :( (but I suspect quality would be too bad anyway)
> 
> laptop_mode D
> 	io_schedule+0xe/0x20

Looks suspicious to me.  Can you identify what line of code this points to?

> 	sync_buffer+0x35/0x40
> 	__wait_on_bit+0x45/0x70
> 	out_of_line_wait_on_bit+0x6c/0x80
> 	__wait_on_buffer+0x27/0x30
> 	search_by_key+0x15e/0x1250 [reiserfs]
> 	reiserfs_read_locked_inode+0x64/0x570 [reiserfs]
> 	reiserfs_iget+0x7e/0xa0 [reiserfs]
> 	reiserfs_lookup+0xc7/0x120 [reiserfs]
> 	do_lookup+0x138/0x180
> 	__link_path_walk+0x787/0xce0
> 	link_path_walk+0x44/0xc0
> 	path_walk+0x18/0x20
> 	do_path_lookup_0x88/0x210
> 	__path_lookupintent_open+0x4d/0x90
> 	path_lookup_open+0x1f/0x30
> 	open_exec+0x28/0xb0
> 	do_execve+0x36/0x1d0
> 	sys_execve+0x2e/0x80
> 	sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x99
> 
> 90clock D
> 	__mutex_lock_slow_path+0xa1/0x290
> 	mutex_lock+0x21/0x30
> 	do_lookup+0xa1/0x180
> 	__link_path_walk+0x44/0xc0
> 	path_walk+0x18/0x20
> 	do_path_lookup+0x78/0x210
> 	__user_walk_fd+0x38/0x50
> 	vfs_stat_fd+0x21/0x50
> 	vfs_stat+0x11/0x20
> 	sys_stat64+0x14/0x30
> 	sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x99
> 
> alsactl D
> 	io_schedule+0xe/0x20

Same here.  Hmm.

> 	sync_page+0x35/0x40
> 	__wait_on_bit_lock+0x3f/0x70
> 	__lock_page+0x68/0x70
> 	filemap_nopage+0x16c/0x300
> 	__handle_mm_faul+0x1d7/0x610
> 	do_page_fault+0x1d7/0x610
> 	error_code+0x6a/0x70
> 	padzero+0x1f/0x30
> 	load_elf_binary+0x743/0x1ab0
> 	search_binary_handler+0x7b/0x1f0
> 	do_execve+0x137/0x1d0
> 	sys_execve+0x2e/0x80
> 	sysenter_past_esp+0x5f/0x90
> 
> After that I could remount, sync and reboot using SysRq (well, after reboot it 
> still insisted on replaying insane number of transactions so may be it did 
> *not* remount / ro after all). Before reboot there was brief output that 
> resembled lockdep warnings, but it went too fast to be readable.
> 
> usual stuff follows

I see you're using CFQ as the default IO scheduler.  Can you please switch to
AS and see if that changes anything?

Greetings,
Rafael


-- 
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." - Donald Knuth
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/