From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, barryn@pobox.com,
marado@student.dei.uc.pt, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: 2.6.11-rc4-mm1: something is wrong with swsusp powerdown
Date: 01 Mar 2005 10:33:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1ll97qni5.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050301120843.GN1345@elf.ucw.cz>
Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> writes:
> > I threw it together to test a specific code path, and the fact it
> > fails in software suspend is actually almost confirmation that I am on
> > the right track. This actually fixed the case I was testing.
> >
> > In this case the failure is simply because system_state is
> > not set to SYSTEM_POWER_OFF before
> > kernel/power/disk.c:power_down() calls device_shutdown().
> > The appropriate reboot notifier is also not called..
>
> Can you suggest patch to do it right? Or perhaps there should be
> just_plain_power_machine_down() that does all neccessary
> trickery?
I would call it kernel_power_down() and that
is what I am suggesting is the right fix.
We have it open coded in kernel/sys.c:sys_reboot()
in the switch case for: LINUX_REBOOT_CMD_POWER_OFF
So after the code gets factored out from there all
of the cases that call machine_power_off() and pm_power_off()
directly need to be updated.
There are similar cases for machine_restart() and machine_halt().
But the power off case seems to be the most acute.
My biggest problem with this is I get into the recursive code
cleanup problem. Where I fix one piece and a bug is exposed somewhere
else. And that then requires investigation and fixing.
Fixing the callers of machine_power_off() is about the fifth bug
fix down the chain triggered by disabling UP interrupts in
device_shutdown(), SMP interrupts have always been disabled. With the
first bug fix was to create system devices in the device tree..
I haven't a clue where fixing this one will lead. Recursive
code fixes are a hard thing to schedule :(
Eric
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-01 17:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20050228231721.GA1326@elf.ucw.cz>
[not found] ` <20050228231721.GA1326-I/5MKhXcvmPrBKCeMvbIDA@public.gmane.org>
2005-03-01 9:52 ` 2.6.11-rc4-mm1: something is wrong with swsusp powerdown Andrew Morton
2005-03-01 10:54 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <20050301105448.GG1345-I/5MKhXcvmPrBKCeMvbIDA@public.gmane.org>
2005-03-01 11:12 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-03-01 12:02 ` Pavel Machek
2005-03-01 11:08 ` Eric W. Biederman
2005-03-01 12:08 ` Pavel Machek
2005-03-01 17:33 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m1ll97qni5.fsf@ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=barryn@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marado@student.dei.uc.pt \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox