* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
@ 2016-06-10 15:41 Mason
2016-06-10 21:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mason @ 2016-06-10 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hello,
I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
(It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
Regards.
# echo mem > /sys/power/state
[ 30.722352] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
[ 30.727146] PM: Preparing system for sleep (mem)
[ 30.736927] Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done.
[ 30.745519] Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done.
[ 30.754098] PM: Suspending system (mem)
[ 30.760934] PM: suspend of devices complete after 2.104 msecs
[ 30.767638] PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.883 msecs
[ 30.774529] PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 0.653 msecs
[ 30.780846] Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
[ 30.795697] CPU1: shutdown
[ 30.795701] IN tango_cpu_die
[ 30.795709] CPU1: smp_ops.cpu_die() returned, trying to resuscitate
[ 30.795730] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0/0x00000002
[ 30.795735] Modules linked in:
[ 30.795756] Preemption disabled at:[<c04a5898>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x20/0x24
[ 30.795757]
[ 30.795766] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 30.795768] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 30.795773] Backtrace:
[ 30.795790] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
[ 30.795797] r7:60000013 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
[ 30.795811] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
[ 30.795820] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c013cb34>] (__schedule_bug+0x6c/0xb8)
[ 30.795827] r7:c0802638 r6:e745f6c0 r5:e7ae8ec0 r4:e7460000
[ 30.795833] [<c013cac8>] (__schedule_bug) from [<c04a522c>] (__schedule+0x434/0x530)
[ 30.795837] r5:e7ae8ec0 r4:c0736ec0
[ 30.795842] [<c04a4df8>] (__schedule) from [<c04a5378>] (schedule+0x50/0xb0)
[ 30.795852] r10:00000000 r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494
[ 30.795855] r4:e7460000
[ 30.795861] [<c04a5328>] (schedule) from [<c04a5890>] (schedule_preempt_disabled+0x18/0x24)
[ 30.795865] r5:c0802494 r4:e7460000
[ 30.795876] [<c04a5878>] (schedule_preempt_disabled) from [<c0155f0c>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x10c/0x18c)
[ 30.795884] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
[ 30.795888] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
[ 30.795898] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
[ 30.795902] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
[ 30.952513] IN tango_cpu_kill
[ 30.955537] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000010
[ 30.963668] pgd = c0004000
[ 30.966382] [00000010] *pgd=00000000
[ 30.969976] Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
[ 30.975312] Modules linked in:
[ 30.978379] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Tainted: G W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 30.989478] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 30.993503] task: e745f6c0 ti: e7460000 task.ti: e7460000
[ 30.998933] PC is at __tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x2d8/0x444
[ 31.004188] LR is at debug_smp_processor_id+0x20/0x24
[ 31.009262] pc : [<c0184d1c>] lr : [<c030305c>] psr: 60000093
[ 31.009262] sp : e7461f50 ip : e7461f20 fp : e7461fac
[ 31.020800] r10: 00000000 r9 : 00000000 r8 : 00000000
[ 31.026047] r7 : 00000000 r6 : 0032dcd5 r5 : 00000001 r4 : e7ae6e38
[ 31.032605] r3 : 00000000 r2 : 0032dcd5 r1 : 00000000 r0 : 0032dcd5
[ 31.039164] Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none
[ 31.046420] Control: 10c5387d Table: 8000404a DAC: 00000051
[ 31.052192] Process swapper/1 (pid: 0, stack limit = 0xe7460210)
[ 31.058226] Stack: (0xe7461f50 to 0xe7462000)
[ 31.062602] 1f40: c04a4fcc c013c8b0 00000001 00000000
[ 31.070821] 1f60: 35293313 00000007 34faa6c3 00000007 34f6563e 00000007 34faa6c3 00000007
[ 31.079041] 1f80: ffffffff 7fffffff c0734e38 c0802494 c05ce0b8 c081e2d6 c05b8b6c c08024f8
[ 31.087261] 1fa0: e7461fc4 e7461fb0 c0185294 c0184a50 e7460000 c0802494 e7461fdc e7461fc8
[ 31.095480] 1fc0: c0155e58 c0185258 c080b530 c081e2d6 e7461ff4 e7461fe0 c010dc14 c0155e0c
[ 31.103700] 1fe0: 00000001 c0802494 00000000 e7461ff8 c04a9208 c010dac8 454115f5 56b2e41b
[ 31.111916] Backtrace:
[ 31.114376] [<c0184a44>] (__tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0185294>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x48/0x80)
[ 31.123553] r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494 r4:c0734e38
[ 31.131353] [<c018524c>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0155e58>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x58/0x18c)
[ 31.140181] r5:c0802494 r4:e7460000
[ 31.143778] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
[ 31.152868] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
[ 31.156464] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
[ 31.166253] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
[ 31.169848] Code: e89dabf0 e14b24d4 e1a00004 ebffff22 (e1c821d0)
[ 31.175972] ---[ end trace 5e1e78cb2505c930 ]---
[ 31.180611] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
[ 31.187346] CPU0: stopping
[ 31.190064] CPU: 0 PID: 10 Comm: migration/0 Tainted: G D W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 31.201426] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 31.205449] Backtrace:
[ 31.207911] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
[ 31.215516] r7:20000193 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
[ 31.221218] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
[ 31.228478] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c010e034>] (handle_IPI+0x1a0/0x1b4)
[ 31.235909] r7:00000000 r6:00000004 r5:00000000 r4:c0735428
[ 31.241607] [<c010de94>] (handle_IPI) from [<c01014ec>] (gic_handle_irq+0x90/0x94)
[ 31.249212] r9:e8803100 r8:e8802100 r7:e745de78 r6:e880210c r5:c080277c r4:c080ed20
[ 31.257008] [<c010145c>] (gic_handle_irq) from [<c010c694>] (__irq_svc+0x54/0x90)
[ 31.264527] Exception stack(0xe745de78 to 0xe745dec0)
[ 31.269600] de60: 00000000 c05bfe50
[ 31.277820] de80: 00000000 00000001 e6e49cfc 00000001 e6e49ce8 20000013 00000000 e7ad9eec
[ 31.286039] dea0: e6e49c90 e745deec e745deb8 e745dec8 c030305c c01910b8 60000013 ffffffff
[ 31.294255] r9:e7ad9eec r8:00000000 r7:e745deac r6:ffffffff r5:60000013 r4:c01910b8
[ 31.302057] [<c0191008>] (multi_cpu_stop) from [<c0191304>] (cpu_stopper_thread+0xa8/0x120)
[ 31.310448] r9:e7ad9eec r8:e745c000 r7:e6e49ce8 r6:c0191008 r5:e7ad9ee4 r4:e7ad9ee0
[ 31.318245] [<c019125c>] (cpu_stopper_thread) from [<c013b500>] (smpboot_thread_fn+0x164/0x288)
[ 31.326985] r10:ffffe000 r9:c080a9bc r8:00000000 r7:00000001 r6:00000000 r5:e7418680
[ 31.334866] r4:e745c000
[ 31.337412] [<c013b39c>] (smpboot_thread_fn) from [<c0138434>] (kthread+0xe4/0xfc)
[ 31.345017] r10:00000000 r9:00000000 r8:00000000 r7:c013b39c r6:e7418680 r5:e7418500
[ 31.352898] r4:00000000 r3:e7452080
[ 31.356493] [<c0138350>] (kthread) from [<c0107c18>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x3c)
[ 31.363749] r7:00000000 r6:00000000 r5:c0138350 r4:e7418500
[ 31.369447] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-10 15:41 Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores Mason
@ 2016-06-10 21:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-10 21:37 ` Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2016-06-10 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
>
> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
system suspend.
> # echo mem > /sys/power/state
> [ 30.722352] PM: Syncing filesystems ... done.
> [ 30.727146] PM: Preparing system for sleep (mem)
> [ 30.736927] Freezing user space processes ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done.
> [ 30.745519] Freezing remaining freezable tasks ... (elapsed 0.001 seconds) done.
> [ 30.754098] PM: Suspending system (mem)
> [ 30.760934] PM: suspend of devices complete after 2.104 msecs
> [ 30.767638] PM: late suspend of devices complete after 0.883 msecs
> [ 30.774529] PM: noirq suspend of devices complete after 0.653 msecs
> [ 30.780846] Disabling non-boot CPUs ...
> [ 30.795697] CPU1: shutdown
> [ 30.795701] IN tango_cpu_die
> [ 30.795709] CPU1: smp_ops.cpu_die() returned, trying to resuscitate
> [ 30.795730] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0/0x00000002
> [ 30.795735] Modules linked in:
> [ 30.795756] Preemption disabled at:[<c04a5898>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x20/0x24
> [ 30.795757]
> [ 30.795766] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
> [ 30.795768] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
> [ 30.795773] Backtrace:
> [ 30.795790] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
> [ 30.795797] r7:60000013 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
> [ 30.795811] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
> [ 30.795820] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c013cb34>] (__schedule_bug+0x6c/0xb8)
> [ 30.795827] r7:c0802638 r6:e745f6c0 r5:e7ae8ec0 r4:e7460000
> [ 30.795833] [<c013cac8>] (__schedule_bug) from [<c04a522c>] (__schedule+0x434/0x530)
> [ 30.795837] r5:e7ae8ec0 r4:c0736ec0
> [ 30.795842] [<c04a4df8>] (__schedule) from [<c04a5378>] (schedule+0x50/0xb0)
> [ 30.795852] r10:00000000 r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494
> [ 30.795855] r4:e7460000
> [ 30.795861] [<c04a5328>] (schedule) from [<c04a5890>] (schedule_preempt_disabled+0x18/0x24)
> [ 30.795865] r5:c0802494 r4:e7460000
> [ 30.795876] [<c04a5878>] (schedule_preempt_disabled) from [<c0155f0c>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x10c/0x18c)
> [ 30.795884] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
> [ 30.795888] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
> [ 30.795898] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
> [ 30.795902] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
> [ 30.952513] IN tango_cpu_kill
> [ 30.955537] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000010
> [ 30.963668] pgd = c0004000
> [ 30.966382] [00000010] *pgd=00000000
> [ 30.969976] Internal error: Oops: 5 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
> [ 30.975312] Modules linked in:
> [ 30.978379] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Tainted: G W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
> [ 30.989478] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
> [ 30.993503] task: e745f6c0 ti: e7460000 task.ti: e7460000
> [ 30.998933] PC is at __tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x2d8/0x444
> [ 31.004188] LR is at debug_smp_processor_id+0x20/0x24
> [ 31.009262] pc : [<c0184d1c>] lr : [<c030305c>] psr: 60000093
> [ 31.009262] sp : e7461f50 ip : e7461f20 fp : e7461fac
> [ 31.020800] r10: 00000000 r9 : 00000000 r8 : 00000000
> [ 31.026047] r7 : 00000000 r6 : 0032dcd5 r5 : 00000001 r4 : e7ae6e38
> [ 31.032605] r3 : 00000000 r2 : 0032dcd5 r1 : 00000000 r0 : 0032dcd5
> [ 31.039164] Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none
> [ 31.046420] Control: 10c5387d Table: 8000404a DAC: 00000051
> [ 31.052192] Process swapper/1 (pid: 0, stack limit = 0xe7460210)
> [ 31.058226] Stack: (0xe7461f50 to 0xe7462000)
> [ 31.062602] 1f40: c04a4fcc c013c8b0 00000001 00000000
> [ 31.070821] 1f60: 35293313 00000007 34faa6c3 00000007 34f6563e 00000007 34faa6c3 00000007
> [ 31.079041] 1f80: ffffffff 7fffffff c0734e38 c0802494 c05ce0b8 c081e2d6 c05b8b6c c08024f8
> [ 31.087261] 1fa0: e7461fc4 e7461fb0 c0185294 c0184a50 e7460000 c0802494 e7461fdc e7461fc8
> [ 31.095480] 1fc0: c0155e58 c0185258 c080b530 c081e2d6 e7461ff4 e7461fe0 c010dc14 c0155e0c
> [ 31.103700] 1fe0: 00000001 c0802494 00000000 e7461ff8 c04a9208 c010dac8 454115f5 56b2e41b
> [ 31.111916] Backtrace:
> [ 31.114376] [<c0184a44>] (__tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0185294>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x48/0x80)
> [ 31.123553] r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494 r4:c0734e38
> [ 31.131353] [<c018524c>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0155e58>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x58/0x18c)
> [ 31.140181] r5:c0802494 r4:e7460000
> [ 31.143778] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
> [ 31.152868] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
> [ 31.156464] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
> [ 31.166253] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
> [ 31.169848] Code: e89dabf0 e14b24d4 e1a00004 ebffff22 (e1c821d0)
> [ 31.175972] ---[ end trace 5e1e78cb2505c930 ]---
> [ 31.180611] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
> [ 31.187346] CPU0: stopping
> [ 31.190064] CPU: 0 PID: 10 Comm: migration/0 Tainted: G D W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
> [ 31.201426] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
> [ 31.205449] Backtrace:
> [ 31.207911] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
> [ 31.215516] r7:20000193 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
> [ 31.221218] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
> [ 31.228478] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c010e034>] (handle_IPI+0x1a0/0x1b4)
> [ 31.235909] r7:00000000 r6:00000004 r5:00000000 r4:c0735428
> [ 31.241607] [<c010de94>] (handle_IPI) from [<c01014ec>] (gic_handle_irq+0x90/0x94)
> [ 31.249212] r9:e8803100 r8:e8802100 r7:e745de78 r6:e880210c r5:c080277c r4:c080ed20
> [ 31.257008] [<c010145c>] (gic_handle_irq) from [<c010c694>] (__irq_svc+0x54/0x90)
> [ 31.264527] Exception stack(0xe745de78 to 0xe745dec0)
> [ 31.269600] de60: 00000000 c05bfe50
> [ 31.277820] de80: 00000000 00000001 e6e49cfc 00000001 e6e49ce8 20000013 00000000 e7ad9eec
> [ 31.286039] dea0: e6e49c90 e745deec e745deb8 e745dec8 c030305c c01910b8 60000013 ffffffff
> [ 31.294255] r9:e7ad9eec r8:00000000 r7:e745deac r6:ffffffff r5:60000013 r4:c01910b8
> [ 31.302057] [<c0191008>] (multi_cpu_stop) from [<c0191304>] (cpu_stopper_thread+0xa8/0x120)
> [ 31.310448] r9:e7ad9eec r8:e745c000 r7:e6e49ce8 r6:c0191008 r5:e7ad9ee4 r4:e7ad9ee0
> [ 31.318245] [<c019125c>] (cpu_stopper_thread) from [<c013b500>] (smpboot_thread_fn+0x164/0x288)
> [ 31.326985] r10:ffffe000 r9:c080a9bc r8:00000000 r7:00000001 r6:00000000 r5:e7418680
> [ 31.334866] r4:e745c000
> [ 31.337412] [<c013b39c>] (smpboot_thread_fn) from [<c0138434>] (kthread+0xe4/0xfc)
> [ 31.345017] r10:00000000 r9:00000000 r8:00000000 r7:c013b39c r6:e7418680 r5:e7418500
> [ 31.352898] r4:00000000 r3:e7452080
> [ 31.356493] [<c0138350>] (kthread) from [<c0107c18>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x3c)
> [ 31.363749] r7:00000000 r6:00000000 r5:c0138350 r4:e7418500
> [ 31.369447] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
> --
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-10 21:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2016-06-10 21:37 ` Mason
2016-06-13 12:06 ` Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mason @ 2016-06-10 21:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 10/06/2016 23:35, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
^^^^^
Your clock is 5 minutes ahead ;-)
> On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
>
>> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
>> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
>>
>> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
>> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
>
> This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
> system suspend.
You may be right, I will try just off-lining cpu1.
Suspend may be a red herring.
By the way, I know my implementation of tango_cpu_die
is incorrect, I was testing the failure mode.
Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-10 21:37 ` Mason
@ 2016-06-13 12:06 ` Mason
2016-06-13 13:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mason @ 2016-06-13 12:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 10/06/2016 23:37, Mason wrote:
> On 10/06/2016 23:35, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>> On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
>>
>>> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
>>> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
>>>
>>> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
>>> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
>>
>> This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
>> system suspend.
>
> You may be right, I will try just off-lining cpu1.
> Suspend may be a red herring.
>
> By the way, I know my implementation of tango_cpu_die
> is incorrect, I was testing the failure mode.
Hello Rafael,
Suspend was indeed a red herring. Manually requesting cpu1 off-lining
also makes Linux panic when cpu_die() unexpectedly returns.
The subject should perhaps have been:
Linux panics when secondary core off-lining fails
Could it be made to fail more gracefully?
Or is this borkage inherent to the failed operation?
Or is it a bug in my platform code?
(A bug other than tango_cpu_die() failing to kill the core.)
#ifdef CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU
static int tango_cpu_kill(unsigned int cpu)
{
printk("IN %s\n", __func__);
return 1;
}
static void tango_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
{
printk("IN %s\n", __func__);
}
#endif
Regards.
# echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/online
[ 60.619026] CPU1: shutdown
[ 60.619031] IN tango_cpu_die
[ 60.619041] CPU1: smp_ops.cpu_die() returned, trying to resuscitate
[ 60.619063] BUG: scheduling while atomic: swapper/1/0/0x00000002
[ 60.619069] Modules linked in:
[ 60.619088] Preemption disabled at:[<c04a5898>] schedule_preempt_disabled+0x20/0x24
[ 60.619089]
[ 60.619098] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Not tainted 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 60.619099] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 60.619104] Backtrace:
[ 60.619121] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
[ 60.619129] r7:60000013 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
[ 60.619141] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
[ 60.619150] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c013cb34>] (__schedule_bug+0x6c/0xb8)
[ 60.619157] r7:c0802638 r6:df45b6c0 r5:dfbeaec0 r4:df45c000
[ 60.619162] [<c013cac8>] (__schedule_bug) from [<c04a522c>] (__schedule+0x434/0x530)
[ 60.619167] r5:dfbeaec0 r4:c0736ec0
[ 60.619172] [<c04a4df8>] (__schedule) from [<c04a5378>] (schedule+0x50/0xb0)
[ 60.619182] r10:00000000 r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494
[ 60.619184] r4:df45c000
[ 60.619190] [<c04a5328>] (schedule) from [<c04a5890>] (schedule_preempt_disabled+0x18/0x24)
[ 60.619195] r5:c0802494 r4:df45c000
[ 60.619206] [<c04a5878>] (schedule_preempt_disabled) from [<c0155f0c>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x10c/0x18c)
[ 60.619213] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
[ 60.619218] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
[ 60.619226] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
[ 60.619231] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
[ 60.775838] IN tango_cpu_kill
[ 60.779453] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000010
[ 60.787593] pgd = c0004000
[ 60.790307] [00000010] *pgd=00000000
[ 60.793901] Internal error: Oops: 17 [#1] PREEMPT SMP ARM
[ 60.799324] Modules linked in:
[ 60.802393] CPU: 1 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/1 Tainted: G W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 60.813493] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 60.817518] task: df45b6c0 ti: df45c000 task.ti: df45c000
[ 60.822948] PC is at __tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x2d8/0x444
[ 60.828204] LR is at debug_smp_processor_id+0x20/0x24
[ 60.833278] pc : [<c0184d1c>] lr : [<c030305c>] psr: 60000093
[ 60.833278] sp : df45df50 ip : df45df20 fp : df45dfac
[ 60.844815] r10: 00000000 r9 : 00000000 r8 : 00000000
[ 60.850063] r7 : 00000000 r6 : 0032dcd5 r5 : 00000001 r4 : dfbe8e38
[ 60.856620] r3 : 00000000 r2 : 0032dcd5 r1 : 00000000 r0 : 0032dcd5
[ 60.863179] Flags: nZCv IRQs off FIQs on Mode SVC_32 ISA ARM Segment none
[ 60.870435] Control: 10c5387d Table: 9ed8804a DAC: 00000051
[ 60.876206] Process swapper/1 (pid: 0, stack limit = 0xdf45c210)
[ 60.882240] Stack: (0xdf45df50 to 0xdf45e000)
[ 60.886616] df40: c04a4fcc c013c8b0 00000001 00000000
[ 60.894836] df60: 26c51b42 0000000e 269f8229 0000000e 26923e6d 0000000e 269f8229 0000000e
[ 60.903057] df80: ffffffff 7fffffff c0734e38 c0802494 c05ce0b8 c081e2d6 c05b8b6c c08024f8
[ 60.911276] dfa0: df45dfc4 df45dfb0 c0185294 c0184a50 df45c000 c0802494 df45dfdc df45dfc8
[ 60.919495] dfc0: c0155e58 c0185258 c080b530 c081e2d6 df45dff4 df45dfe0 c010dc14 c0155e0c
[ 60.927716] dfe0: 00000001 c0802494 00000000 df45dff8 c04a9208 c010dac8 c1640288 22a54aa8
[ 60.935932] Backtrace:
[ 60.938391] [<c0184a44>] (__tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0185294>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter+0x48/0x80)
[ 60.947569] r9:c08024f8 r8:c05b8b6c r7:c081e2d6 r6:c05ce0b8 r5:c0802494 r4:c0734e38
[ 60.955370] [<c018524c>] (tick_nohz_idle_enter) from [<c0155e58>] (cpu_startup_entry+0x58/0x18c)
[ 60.964198] r5:c0802494 r4:df45c000
[ 60.967796] [<c0155e00>] (cpu_startup_entry) from [<c010dc14>] (secondary_start_kernel+0x158/0x164)
[ 60.976885] r7:c081e2d6 r4:c080b530
[ 60.980485] [<c010dabc>] (secondary_start_kernel) from [<c04a9208>] (_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x30/0x5c)
[ 60.990273] r5:c0802494 r4:00000001
[ 60.993867] Code: e89dabf0 e14b24d4 e1a00004 ebffff22 (e1c821d0)
[ 60.999991] ---[ end trace b2639488439a8390 ]---
[ 61.004631] Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
[ 61.011368] CPU0: stopping
[ 61.014087] CPU: 0 PID: 10 Comm: migration/0 Tainted: G D W 4.7.0-rc1-next-20160530-00002-g6c94ca0b0db1-dirty #117
[ 61.025448] Hardware name: Sigma Tango DT
[ 61.029471] Backtrace:
[ 61.031936] [<c010b974>] (dump_backtrace) from [<c010bb70>] (show_stack+0x18/0x1c)
[ 61.039542] r7:20000193 r6:c080eb04 r5:00000000 r4:c080eb04
[ 61.045246] [<c010bb58>] (show_stack) from [<c02eb084>] (dump_stack+0x80/0x94)
[ 61.052507] [<c02eb004>] (dump_stack) from [<c010e034>] (handle_IPI+0x1a0/0x1b4)
[ 61.059936] r7:00000000 r6:00000004 r5:00000000 r4:c0735428
[ 61.065635] [<c010de94>] (handle_IPI) from [<c01014ec>] (gic_handle_irq+0x90/0x94)
[ 61.073240] r9:e0803100 r8:e0802100 r7:df459e78 r6:e080210c r5:c080277c r4:c080ed20
[ 61.081038] [<c010145c>] (gic_handle_irq) from [<c010c694>] (__irq_svc+0x54/0x90)
[ 61.088556] Exception stack(0xdf459e78 to 0xdf459ec0)
[ 61.093629] 9e60: 00000000 c05bfe50
[ 61.101849] 9e80: 00000000 00000001 dee37d54 00000001 dee37d40 20000013 00000000 dfbdbeec
[ 61.110069] 9ea0: dee37ce8 df459eec df459eb8 df459ec8 c030305c c01910b8 60000013 ffffffff
[ 61.118285] r9:dfbdbeec r8:00000000 r7:df459eac r6:ffffffff r5:60000013 r4:c01910b8
[ 61.126086] [<c0191008>] (multi_cpu_stop) from [<c0191304>] (cpu_stopper_thread+0xa8/0x120)
[ 61.134477] r9:dfbdbeec r8:df458000 r7:dee37d40 r6:c0191008 r5:dfbdbee4 r4:dfbdbee0
[ 61.142274] [<c019125c>] (cpu_stopper_thread) from [<c013b500>] (smpboot_thread_fn+0x164/0x288)
[ 61.151014] r10:ffffe000 r9:c080a9bc r8:00000000 r7:00000001 r6:00000000 r5:df41a680
[ 61.158894] r4:df458000
[ 61.161440] [<c013b39c>] (smpboot_thread_fn) from [<c0138434>] (kthread+0xe4/0xfc)
[ 61.169045] r10:00000000 r9:00000000 r8:00000000 r7:c013b39c r6:df41a680 r5:df41a500
[ 61.176927] r4:00000000 r3:df44e080
[ 61.180523] [<c0138350>] (kthread) from [<c0107c18>] (ret_from_fork+0x14/0x3c)
[ 61.187778] r7:00000000 r6:00000000 r5:c0138350 r4:df41a500
[ 61.193475] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: Attempted to kill the idle task!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-13 12:06 ` Mason
@ 2016-06-13 13:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-13 13:50 ` Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2016-06-13 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Monday, June 13, 2016 02:06:14 PM Mason wrote:
> On 10/06/2016 23:37, Mason wrote:
>
> > On 10/06/2016 23:35, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> >> On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
> >>> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
> >>>
> >>> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
> >>> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
> >>
> >> This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
> >> system suspend.
> >
> > You may be right, I will try just off-lining cpu1.
> > Suspend may be a red herring.
> >
> > By the way, I know my implementation of tango_cpu_die
> > is incorrect, I was testing the failure mode.
>
> Hello Rafael,
>
> Suspend was indeed a red herring. Manually requesting cpu1 off-lining
> also makes Linux panic when cpu_die() unexpectedly returns.
>
> The subject should perhaps have been:
>
> Linux panics when secondary core off-lining fails
>
> Could it be made to fail more gracefully?
> Or is this borkage inherent to the failed operation?
> Or is it a bug in my platform code?
> (A bug other than tango_cpu_die() failing to kill the core.)
Well, smp_ops.cpu_die() is not expected to return AFAICS, so that may be
the reason why it fails for you the way it does.
Thanks,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-13 13:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2016-06-13 13:50 ` Mason
2016-06-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mason @ 2016-06-13 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 13/06/2016 15:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, June 13, 2016 02:06:14 PM Mason wrote:
>
>> On 10/06/2016 23:37, Mason wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/06/2016 23:35, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
>>>>> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
>>>>> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
>>>>
>>>> This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
>>>> system suspend.
>>>
>>> You may be right, I will try just off-lining cpu1.
>>> Suspend may be a red herring.
>>>
>>> By the way, I know my implementation of tango_cpu_die
>>> is incorrect, I was testing the failure mode.
>>
>> Hello Rafael,
>>
>> Suspend was indeed a red herring. Manually requesting cpu1 off-lining
>> also makes Linux panic when cpu_die() unexpectedly returns.
>>
>> The subject should perhaps have been:
>>
>> Linux panics when secondary core off-lining fails
>>
>> Could it be made to fail more gracefully?
>> Or is this borkage inherent to the failed operation?
>> Or is it a bug in my platform code?
>> (A bug other than tango_cpu_die() failing to kill the core.)
>
> Well, smp_ops.cpu_die() is not expected to return AFAICS, so that may be
> the reason why it fails for you the way it does.
I am aware that smp_ops.cpu_die() is not expected to return.
(I was wondering if the framework could handle it gracefully.)
The actual implementation for cpu_die() asks the firmware to off-line
the current core. If the operation fails, for whatever reason, firmware
is not supposed to return control to Linux?
Is panic the only safe thing to do in Linux:
(If yes, then why doesn't the framework panic immediately?)
static void tango_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
{
ask_firmware_to_offline(cpu);
/* if we return here, something went wrong */
panic("firmware could not offline");
}
Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-13 13:50 ` Mason
@ 2016-06-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-13 21:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2016-06-13 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Monday, June 13, 2016 03:50:56 PM Mason wrote:
> On 13/06/2016 15:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 13, 2016 02:06:14 PM Mason wrote:
> >
> >> On 10/06/2016 23:37, Mason wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 10/06/2016 23:35, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Friday, June 10, 2016 05:41:32 PM Mason wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm playing with S3 Suspend-to-RAM, and I noticed that Linux is really
> >>>>> unhappy when the suspend framework fails to offline secondary cores.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is this expected/by design, or could it fail more gracefully?
> >>>>> (It could also be something missing in my platform's code.)
> >>>>
> >>>> This looks like a CPU offline bug to me which is more general than just
> >>>> system suspend.
> >>>
> >>> You may be right, I will try just off-lining cpu1.
> >>> Suspend may be a red herring.
> >>>
> >>> By the way, I know my implementation of tango_cpu_die
> >>> is incorrect, I was testing the failure mode.
> >>
> >> Hello Rafael,
> >>
> >> Suspend was indeed a red herring. Manually requesting cpu1 off-lining
> >> also makes Linux panic when cpu_die() unexpectedly returns.
> >>
> >> The subject should perhaps have been:
> >>
> >> Linux panics when secondary core off-lining fails
> >>
> >> Could it be made to fail more gracefully?
> >> Or is this borkage inherent to the failed operation?
> >> Or is it a bug in my platform code?
> >> (A bug other than tango_cpu_die() failing to kill the core.)
> >
> > Well, smp_ops.cpu_die() is not expected to return AFAICS, so that may be
> > the reason why it fails for you the way it does.
>
> I am aware that smp_ops.cpu_die() is not expected to return.
> (I was wondering if the framework could handle it gracefully.)
>
> The actual implementation for cpu_die() asks the firmware to off-line
> the current core. If the operation fails, for whatever reason, firmware
> is not supposed to return control to Linux?
Firmware can do what it wants (although ideally it should just do what it is
asked for). smp_ops.cpu_die() is not supposed to return to its caller anyway.
> Is panic the only safe thing to do in Linux:
> (If yes, then why doesn't the framework panic immediately?)
I guess all of the existing implementations of smp_ops.cpu_die() don't return
to the caller no matter what, so the caller did not have to consider anything
else.
And quite frankly I don't see why it would have to. smp_ops.cpu_die() simply
needs to be implemented to never return.
Thanks,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2016-06-13 21:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-06-14 12:42 ` Mason
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2016-06-13 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:49:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> I guess all of the existing implementations of smp_ops.cpu_die() don't return
> to the caller no matter what, so the caller did not have to consider anything
> else.
Existing implementations for hardware which implements CPU hotplug
takes the requested CPU down in such a way that smp_ops.cpu_die()
*never* returns.
We have a number of evaluation boards where its desirable to emulate
CPU hotplug. These boards have no power management abilities, and
have no way to power down or reset a CPU from software. For these,
we implement CPU hotplug by taking the CPU down gracefully, taking
it out of coherency, and then placing it in a loop waiting for the
CPU up event to arrive. At that point (and this is the only legal
time) smp_ops.cpu_die() returns - at which point you get the
resuscitating kernel message, and the CPU re-enters the kernel.
This path is _only_ for these evaluation platforms which have no
hardware support for CPU hotplug, and therefore no PM and no kexec.
The *only* solution to having working PM support Mason's platform is
a properly implemented CPU hotplug correctly - which means ensuring
that the CPU is either powered down or placed in reset during the
smp_ops.cpu_die() call. Everything else (even the simulation of it)
is not good enough.
That can be done either by the dying CPU when it calls into
smp_ops.cpu_die(), or the CPU requesting the death of the CPU via
smp_ops.cpu_kill().
Either way, it's up to the platform code to implement these, and as
I say, a correct and proper implementation of this is a fundamental
requirement for system power management (like suspend) and kexec in
a SMP system.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores
2016-06-13 21:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
@ 2016-06-14 12:42 ` Mason
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Mason @ 2016-06-14 12:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 13/06/2016 23:02, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:49:32PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
>> I guess all of the existing implementations of smp_ops.cpu_die() don't return
>> to the caller no matter what, so the caller did not have to consider anything
>> else.
>
> Existing implementations for hardware which implements CPU hotplug
> takes the requested CPU down in such a way that smp_ops.cpu_die()
> *never* returns.
>
> We have a number of evaluation boards where its desirable to emulate
> CPU hotplug. These boards have no power management abilities, and
> have no way to power down or reset a CPU from software. For these,
> we implement CPU hotplug by taking the CPU down gracefully, taking
> it out of coherency, and then placing it in a loop waiting for the
> CPU up event to arrive. At that point (and this is the only legal
> time) smp_ops.cpu_die() returns - at which point you get the
> resuscitating kernel message, and the CPU re-enters the kernel.
>
> This path is _only_ for these evaluation platforms which have no
> hardware support for CPU hotplug, and therefore no PM and no kexec.
>
> The *only* solution to having working PM support Mason's platform is
> a properly implemented CPU hotplug correctly - which means ensuring
> that the CPU is either powered down or placed in reset during the
> smp_ops.cpu_die() call. Everything else (even the simulation of it)
> is not good enough.
>
> That can be done either by the dying CPU when it calls into
> smp_ops.cpu_die(), or the CPU requesting the death of the CPU via
> smp_ops.cpu_kill().
>
> Either way, it's up to the platform code to implement these, and as
> I say, a correct and proper implementation of this is a fundamental
> requirement for system power management (like suspend) and kexec in
> a SMP system.
Hello Russell,
The current plan is to have cpu_die() jump into the firmware, and have
the firmware "park" the calling core into a WFI loop until someone wants
to online the parked core, via the smp_boot_secondary() callback.
Would that work?
So far, I haven't cared about what HOTPLUG does with the parked core,
because we would just provide HOTPLUG as a requirement for suspend,
which offlines the secondary cores, and then we will power down the
entire SoC.
On a tangential subject, is the scheduler able to off-line idle cores?
Regards.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-06-14 12:42 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-06-10 15:41 Linux panics when suspend cannot offline the secondary cores Mason
2016-06-10 21:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-10 21:37 ` Mason
2016-06-13 12:06 ` Mason
2016-06-13 13:30 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-13 13:50 ` Mason
2016-06-13 20:49 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-06-13 21:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-06-14 12:42 ` Mason
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).