Re: [regression,bisected] restore of disks after suspend-to-disk broken in 3.9.x

[Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>]

On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 15:20 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 28, 2013 02:59:25 PM Giacomo Perale wrote:
> > 2013/5/28 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> > > On Monday, May 27, 2013 10:07:18 PM Giacomo Perale wrote:
> > >> 2013/5/27 Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>:
> > >> > On Sun, 2013-05-26 at 15:51 +0200, Giacomo Perale wrote:
> > >> >> Hello,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> after upgrading from 3.8.7 to 3.9.x I noticed some slightly longer
> > >> >> delays when resuming from suspend-to-disk and a few new error messages
> > >> >> in the logs:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Not having connected the issue with the previous error messages I
> > >> >> initially blamed the disk and replaced it with a new one thinking it
> > >> >> was broken, but the problem persisted so I started a bisection run
> > >> >> that pointed to this commit:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> b8bb6cb999858043489c1ddef08eed2127559169 is the first bad commit
> > >> >> commit b8bb6cb999858043489c1ddef08eed2127559169
> > >> >> Author: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > >> >> Date:   Thu Nov 22 15:45:02 2012 +0800
> > >> >>
> > >> >>     step_wise: Unify the code for both throttle and dethrottle
> > >> >>
> > >> >>     Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > >> >>
> > >> > I do not see how this would affect the sata hibernation/resume.
> > >> > but anyway, would you please try the four patches in comment #10, #11,
> > >> > #12 and #13 in
> > >> > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=58301
> > >> > and check if they help?
> > >> >
> > >> > thanks,
> > >> > rui
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> No luck, with git head and those four patches hibernation is
> > >> completely broken, the system doesn't even shut down, it just loses
> > >> the disks (I'm attaching what I could get from /proc/kmsg to this
> > >> email).
> > >>
> > >> With the fair_share governor or with step_wise _and_ commit
> > >> b8bb6cb999858043489c1ddef08eed2127559169 reverted everything is ok
> > >> again.
> > >>
> > >> I think there's something wrong in the commit logic (for example, why
> > >> are you checking for "instance->target != THERMAL_NO_TARGET" when
> > >> update_instance_for_throttle checked for "instance->target ==
> > >> THERMAL_NO_TARGET"?) but my attempts to fix it failed, probably
> > >> because I'm not sure of what 'continue;' does inside a
> > >> list_for_each_entry macro.
> > >
> > > Can you please attach the output of acpidump from your system?
> > >
> > > Rafael
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > Sure, here it is.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Can you please also check if the patch below makes any difference?
> 
> Rafael
> 
> 
> ---
>  drivers/thermal/step_wise.c |    3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> Index: linux-pm/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> +++ linux-pm/drivers/thermal/step_wise.c
> @@ -131,6 +131,9 @@ static void thermal_zone_trip_update(str
>  			continue;
>  
>  		old_target = instance->target;
> +		if (!throttle && old_target == THERMAL_NO_TARGET)
> +			continue;
> +
As this can fix the problem, so the bug is introduced because some
inactive instance is activated improperly?

thanks,
rui
>  		instance->target = get_target_state(instance, trend, throttle);
>  
>  		/* Activate a passive thermal instance */
> 
>