arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Dieter Kiermaier]

Hi all,

we've discussed some days ago the cpu_idle issue on marvell kirkwood devices.
I got following output sometimes. I don't know if this is really a problem?

------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: at arch/arm/kernel/process.c:171 cpu_idle+0x74/0xbc()
Modules linked in:
[<c002b8bc>] (unwind_backtrace+0x0/0xd8) from [<c003af1c>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x4c/0x68)
[<c003af1c>] (warn_slowpath_common+0x4c/0x68) from [<c00278c4>] (cpu_idle+0x74/0xbc)
[<c00278c4>] (cpu_idle+0x74/0xbc) from [<c0008b2c>] (start_kernel+0x22c/0x27c)
[<c0008b2c>] (start_kernel+0x22c/0x27c) from [<00008034>] (0x8034)
---[ end trace 134046cd7af57c60 ]---

I've tried to apply the patch Simon mentioned at
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2009-October/001624.html
http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/40871/

But it looks like that in rc4 something has changed so the patch didn't apply without errors.
And I don't know enough about this stuff to know what I'm doing :(

Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks in advance,
Dieter

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Sascha Silbe]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Dieter Kiermaier wrote:

> But it looks like that in rc4 something has changed so the patch 
> didn't apply without errors.
It was quite easy to resolve (even though I don't understand any of the 
touched code), see [1] for a rebased patch.
I'm wondering why it wasn't merged upstream yet, though.


[1] 
http://sascha.silbe.org/openrd/0001-apply-cpu_idle-IRQ-fix-from-http-patchwork.kernel.patch

CU Sascha

-- 
http://sascha.silbe.org/
http://www.infra-silbe.de/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20091015/233666d6/attachment.sig>

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Dieter Kiermaier]

Am Donnerstag 15 Oktober 2009 14:10:22 schrieb Sascha Silbe:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Dieter Kiermaier wrote:
> 
> > But it looks like that in rc4 something has changed so the patch 
> > didn't apply without errors.
> It was quite easy to resolve (even though I don't understand any of the 
> touched code), see [1] for a rebased patch.

Many thanks, I was to yellow :)


> I'm wondering why it wasn't merged upstream yet, though.

I'm wondering, too.
Dieter


> 
> 
> [1] 
> http://sascha.silbe.org/openrd/0001-apply-cpu_idle-IRQ-fix-from-http-patchwork.kernel.patch
> 
> CU Sascha
> 

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Joel Stanley]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 22:58, Dieter Kiermaier <dk-arm-linux@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Am Donnerstag 15 Oktober 2009 14:10:22 schrieb Sascha Silbe:
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Dieter Kiermaier wrote:
>>
>> > But it looks like that in rc4 something has changed so the patch
>> > didn't apply without errors.
>> It was quite easy to resolve (even though I don't understand any of the
>> touched code), see [1] for a rebased patch.

I can confirm that the patch fixes the issue; I have been testing for
48 hours on an openrd-client without seeing the WARNING.

>> I'm wondering why it wasn't merged upstream yet, though.
>
> I'm wondering, too.

Agreed.  What can we do to help it on it's way?

Joel

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Alexander Clouter]

Joel Stanley <joel@jms.id.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 22:58, Dieter Kiermaier <dk-arm-linux@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> Am Donnerstag 15 Oktober 2009 14:10:22 schrieb Sascha Silbe:
>
>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 01:52:41PM +0200, Dieter Kiermaier wrote:
>>>
>>> > But it looks like that in rc4 something has changed so the patch
>>> > didn't apply without errors.
>>> It was quite easy to resolve (even though I don't understand any of the
>>> touched code), see [1] for a rebased patch.
> 
> I can confirm that the patch fixes the issue; I have been testing for
> 48 hours on an openrd-client without seeing the WARNING.
> 
>>> I'm wondering why it wasn't merged upstream yet, though.
>>
>> I'm wondering, too.
> 
> Agreed.  What can we do to help it on it's way?
> 
I guess someone could add a bunch of Tested-By's to the LKML posting.

http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/50728/

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: "We live, in a very kooky time."
                  		-- Herb Blashtfalt

arm / kirkwood (openrd): cpu_idle

[Martin Michlmayr]

* Alexander Clouter <alex@digriz.org.uk> [2009-10-16 12:50]:
> >>> I'm wondering why it wasn't merged upstream yet, though.
> >>
> >> I'm wondering, too.
> > 
> > Agreed.  What can we do to help it on it's way?
> > 
> I guess someone could add a bunch of Tested-By's to the LKML posting.

I did and Andrew Morton said he'll make sure it ends up in 2.6.32.
-- 
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/