Re: 2.6.21-rc7-mm1 + sysfs-oops-workaround.patch -- software suspend failed (1 tasks refusing to freeze)

Rafael J. Wysocki
2007-04-25T19:48:46Z

On Wednesday, 25 April 2007 09:48, Miles Lane wrote:
> On 4/25/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 23:41:32 -0700 "Miles Lane" <miles.lane@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 4/24/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:49:48 -0700 "Miles Lane" <miles.lane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 4/24/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:27:44 -0700 "Miles Lane" <miles.lane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ 1251.506964] PM: Preparing system for mem sleep
> > > > > > > [ 1251.514790] Stopping tasks ...
> > > > > > > [ 1271.456065] Stopping user space processes timed out after 20
> > > > > > > seconds (1 tasks refusing to freeze):
> > > > > > > [ 1271.456243] multiload-apple
> > > > > > > [ 1271.456291] Restarting tasks ... done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This isn't happening under earlier builds I've tested. How can I debug this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > hm, that's multiload-applet, some gnome thing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > sysrq-T, perhaps? Perhaps the process is sleeping in the kernel somewhere.
> > > > >
> > > > > Should I wait for the next patch from Tejun before retesting? Perhaps
> > > > > this suspend problem is a side effect of the locking problem he
> > > > > mentioned.
> > > >
> > > > It's unlikely to be related to Tejun's sysfs changes.
> > > >
> > > I tried to reproduce this, but this time when I tried to suspend, the
> > > machine just hung with a message showing saying the system was
> > > suspending. When I touched my Synaptics mousepad after about ten
> > > seconds of waiting, the system suddenly suspended.
> >
> > Fun. Could be one of Greg's trees, could be the swsusp patches, could be
> > the freezer changes, could be USB, could be the input layer, could be
> > anything. I don't see how we can merge anything at all into 2.6.22 at
> > present. The only thing to be said for doing that is that we'd increase
> > our pool of bisection-searchers. argh.
> >
> > Rafael, Oleg: do we have a way of exercising the freezer from userspace?
> > Just do a freeze/unfreeze? We should.
> >
> > Also, can we get better diagnostics when the freeze fails? Say, go the
> > equivalent of a sysrq-T? It could be that multiload-applet is waiting on
> > activity from an already-frozen thread or something.
> >
> > > Upon resuming, I
> > > checked dmesg and found the time seems to be totally out of whack:
> >
> > So sched_clock() went bad. That's another tree or three we can't merge.
> >
> > Is the system time also wrong?
> >
> > > [ 1334.589074] pci 0000:00:1f.6: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589080] Intel ICH 0000:00:1f.5: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589085] pci 0000:00:1f.3: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589091] pci 0000:00:1f.0: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589096] pci 0000:00:1e.0: LATE suspend, may wakeup
> > > [ 1334.589102] pci 0000:00:02.1: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589108] pci 0000:00:02.0: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589113] pci 0000:00:00.3: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589118] pci 0000:00:00.1: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589124] agpgart-intel 0000:00:00.0: LATE suspend
> > > [ 1334.589733] hwsleep-0323 [03] enter_sleep_state : Entering
> > > sleep state [S3]
> > > [18014527.889728] Intel machine check architecture supported.
> > > [18014527.889749] Intel machine check reporting enabled on CPU#0.
> > > [18014527.889783] Back to C!
> > > [18014527.889783] agpgart-intel 0000:00:00.0: EARLY resume
> > > [18014527.889783] PCI: Calling quirk c01c94b2 for 0000:00:00.0
> >
>
> After several attempts, I reproduced getting tasks that won't freeze.
> Sorry for the size of this text. I don't know how to delete the unneeded stuff.

Which wireless driver do you use?

Can you try to suspend with the driver unloaded?

Rafael