From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2350742515386093411==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Al Stone To: lkp@lists.01.org Subject: Re: [ACPI] 7494b07eba: Kernel panic - not syncing: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 0 Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2015 16:52:38 -0600 Message-ID: <56184536.2020009@linaro.org> In-Reply-To: <6420944.JWV5li10OE@vostro.rjw.lan> List-Id: --===============2350742515386093411== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 10/09/2015 03:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, October 08, 2015 05:05:00 PM Al Stone wrote: >> On 10/08/2015 04:50 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 02:32:15 PM Al Stone wrote: >>>> On 10/08/2015 02:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:37:55 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:36:40 AM Al Stone wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/08/2015 05:44 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10/08/2015 11:21 AM, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>>>>>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.g= it master >>>>>>>>> commit 7494b07ebaae2117629024369365f7be7adc16c3 ("ACPI: add in a >>>>>>>>> bad_madt_entry() function to eventually replace the macro") >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ 0.000000] ACPI: undefined MADT subtable type for FADT 4.0: 1= 27 (length 12) [snip....] >> In the meantime, I'll poke the spec folks on the use of reserved subtabl= e IDs >> in the MADT and see what the consensus is there. It may just be a matte= r of >> clarifying the language in the spec. > = > One additional question to ask is what checks have been present in the OS= es > and what they do if they see a reserved MADT subtable ID. If they haven'= t been > doing anything so far, I'm afraid this particular train may be gone alrea= dy. It may be gone. The silence so far is deafening :). >> It's also on my plate to really dig into an ACPI test suite and see about >> building something really robust for that -- this can be added as an exa= mple. >> I'll see if I have time to send in a patch for FWTS, too, which is pretty >> good about capturing such things. > = > Sounds good! > = > Thanks, > Rafael > = Let me know if I need to send the patch to fix the regression elsewhere; it dawned on me long after I sent it that this may not be the right place for = it to go... -- = ciao, al ----------------------------------- Al Stone Software Engineer Linaro Enterprise Group al.stone(a)linaro.org ----------------------------------- --===============2350742515386093411==-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756110AbbJIWwp (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:52:45 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f182.google.com ([209.85.223.182]:36350 "EHLO mail-io0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755820AbbJIWwl (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2015 18:52:41 -0400 Subject: Re: [lkp] [ACPI] 7494b07eba: Kernel panic - not syncing: Watchdog detected hard LOCKUP on cpu 0 To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" References: <871td6xcxc.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> <4975068.hExdhgQqJN@vostro.rjw.lan> <5616F69C.9080900@linaro.org> <6420944.JWV5li10OE@vostro.rjw.lan> Cc: Hanjun Guo , kernel test robot , lkp@01.org, LKML , "Rafael J. Wysocki" From: Al Stone Message-ID: <56184536.2020009@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 16:52:38 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6420944.JWV5li10OE@vostro.rjw.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/09/2015 03:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, October 08, 2015 05:05:00 PM Al Stone wrote: >> On 10/08/2015 04:50 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 02:32:15 PM Al Stone wrote: >>>> On 10/08/2015 02:41 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:37:55 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, October 08, 2015 10:36:40 AM Al Stone wrote: >>>>>>> On 10/08/2015 05:44 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>>>>>> On 10/08/2015 11:21 AM, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>>>>>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master >>>>>>>>> commit 7494b07ebaae2117629024369365f7be7adc16c3 ("ACPI: add in a >>>>>>>>> bad_madt_entry() function to eventually replace the macro") >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> [ 0.000000] ACPI: undefined MADT subtable type for FADT 4.0: 127 (length 12) [snip....] >> In the meantime, I'll poke the spec folks on the use of reserved subtable IDs >> in the MADT and see what the consensus is there. It may just be a matter of >> clarifying the language in the spec. > > One additional question to ask is what checks have been present in the OSes > and what they do if they see a reserved MADT subtable ID. If they haven't been > doing anything so far, I'm afraid this particular train may be gone already. It may be gone. The silence so far is deafening :). >> It's also on my plate to really dig into an ACPI test suite and see about >> building something really robust for that -- this can be added as an example. >> I'll see if I have time to send in a patch for FWTS, too, which is pretty >> good about capturing such things. > > Sounds good! > > Thanks, > Rafael > Let me know if I need to send the patch to fix the regression elsewhere; it dawned on me long after I sent it that this may not be the right place for it to go... -- ciao, al ----------------------------------- Al Stone Software Engineer Linaro Enterprise Group al.stone@linaro.org -----------------------------------