Re: 3.12: kernel panic when resuming from suspend to RAM (x86_64)

[Francis Moreau <francis.moro@gmail.com>]

On 11/22/2013 01:54 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Friday, November 22, 2013 10:57:25 AM Francis Moreau wrote:
>> Le 22/11/2013 08:43, Francis Moreau a écrit :
>>> Le 21/11/2013 12:17, Jingoo Han a écrit :
>>> [...]
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also I took a look at the changes between v3.11 and v3.12 in this area
>>>>>> and those changes match the issue I'm facing:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ git log --oneline v3.11..v3.12 -- drivers/mfd/rtsx_pcr.c
>>>>>> 09fd867 mfd: rtsx: Copyright modifications
>>>>>> eb891c6 mfd: rtsx: Configure to enter a deeper power-saving mode in S3
>>>>>> 7140812 mfd: rtsx: Move some actions from rtsx_pci_init_hw to individual
>>>>>> extra_init_hw
>>>>>> 5947c16 mfd: rtsx: Add shutdown callback in rtsx_pci_driver
>>>>>> 773ccdf mfd: rtsx: Read vendor setting from config space
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, rtsx_pci_resume()/rtsx_pci_suspend() in realtek PCIe card
>>>> reader driver may make the kernel panic.
>>>>
>>>> I think that the commit "mfd: rtsx: Configure to enter a deeper
>>>> power-saving mode in S3" may be the culprit.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately no, reverting this commit on top of v3.12 doesn't help. I
>>> also reverted 7140812, 5947c16 but it didn't improve anything.
>>>
>>> The good news is that I managed to have a "light" kernel configuration
>>> which is faster to build and more important it seems that the bug is
>>> almost 100% reproductible now.
>>>
>>> So I'll try to do another git-bisect session later.
>>
>> So after bisecting between v3.11..v3.12 range, git bisect told me:
>>
>> the first bad commit is 551f5c74e17ba9257cdc35bf657ee448cad2d5b0
>>
>> Merge branch 'acpi-processor'
>>
>>     * acpi-processor:
>>       ACPI / processor: Acquire writer lock to update CPU maps
>>       ACPI / processor: Remove acpi_processor_get_limit_info()
>>
>> The two commits brought by the merge are not the culprits because
>> reseting HEAD on "ACPI / processor: Acquire writer lock to update CPU
>> maps" doesn't have the issue anymore.
>>
>> At that point I'm not sure how to bisect futher.
> 
> Does the second parent of this merge (that is, 8462d9df9d50) have the problem?
> 

Yes it does.

Ok, I've finally managed to find out the bad commit:
ad07277e82dedabacc52c82746633680a3187d25: ACPI / PM: Hold acpi_scan_lock
over system PM transitions

I verified that the parent commit doesn't have the problem.

Rafael, you're the man now ;)

Thanks