From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>,
Zdenek Kabelac <zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: Regression in suspend to ram in 2.6.31-rc kernels
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 00:32:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200909120032.13164.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090911222154.GB11441@elf.ucw.cz>
On Saturday 12 September 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Sat 2009-09-12 00:04:02, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday 11 September 2009, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> > > Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> writes:
> > >
> > > > On Wed 2009-09-09 22:21:56, OGAWA Hirofumi wrote:
> > > >> Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> writes:
> > > >>
> > > >> >> It seems
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> 1) sync() (probabry "sync" command)
> > > >> >> 2) sync as part of suspend sequence
> > > >> >> 3) sync_filesystem() by mmc remove event
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> I guess the root-cause of the problem would be 3). However, it would not
> > > >> >> be easy to fix, at least, we would need to think about what we want to
> > > >> >> do for it. So, to workaround it for now, I've made this patch.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > MMC driver trying to synchronize filesystems looks like ugly layering
> > > >> > violation to me. Why are we doing that?
> > > >>
> > > >> There is no _layering violation_ here. IIRC, mmc just tells card removed
> > > >> event to another layer (on some points of view, to tell event can be
> > > >> wrong though). The partition (block) layer does it by event.
> > > >
> > > > So what is the problem? Emulating sync when card is already removed
> > > > seems little ... interesting?
> > >
> > > Um..., sorry, I'm not sure what are you talking about. Of course, the
> > > problem of this is that system freeze on suspend.
> > >
> > > Or are you asking my guess of the cause, or something? If so, although
> > > I'm not reading all emails on this thread, from Zdenek's backtrace, the
> > > sequence would be
> > >
> > > 1) suspend mmc
> > > 2) mmc generates card removed event
> >
> > Which shouldn't happen.
>
> Are you sure? IIRC it depends on CONFIG_MMC_UNSAFE_RESUME.
Generating the event at this point is too late, because there's no way to
handle it cleanly with the current suspend/resume design.
It probably will work if the event is generated before we freeze the user
space, for example with the help of a suspend notifier, but generating it
from a driver's suspend routine is not valid.
Again, that's a consequence of the lack of a general solution for handling
"removable" file systems over suspend/resume.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-11 22:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-31 11:51 Regression in suspend to ram in 2.6.31-rc kernels Zdenek Kabelac
2009-08-31 19:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-01 9:34 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-03 22:29 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-03 23:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-09-04 0:47 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-04 9:13 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-05 17:22 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-05 19:53 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-05 22:42 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-08 8:10 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-09 13:15 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-07 12:51 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-09 13:21 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-10 19:23 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 6:39 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-11 20:09 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 21:14 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-11 21:32 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 21:45 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-11 21:51 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 22:22 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-14 20:05 ` Pierre Ossman
2009-09-14 20:25 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 22:29 ` Chris Ball
2009-09-11 22:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-14 8:39 ` Zdenek Kabelac
2009-09-14 19:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-14 20:27 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-18 11:15 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
2009-09-18 21:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-11 22:22 ` Chris Ball
2009-09-11 22:04 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-11 22:21 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-11 22:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2009-09-08 19:06 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-09-08 19:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-09-09 13:52 ` OGAWA Hirofumi
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=200909120032.13164.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=zdenek.kabelac@gmail.com \
/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