From: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>,
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
"Moore, Robert" <robert.moore@intel.com>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] PCI / ACPI / PM: Platform support for PCI PME wake-up (rev. 7)
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:04:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100210230438.GC17115@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201002102358.00359.rjw@sisk.pl>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 11:58:00PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 February 2010, Gary Hade wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:42:11PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 10 February 2010, Gary Hade wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 07:00:54PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday 10 February 2010, Gary Hade wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 02:12:29AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday 10 February 2010, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday 10 February 2010, Gary Hade wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 12:58:39PM -0800, Gary Hade wrote:
> > > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > > > > > OK. I already confirmed that the problem reproduces with your
> > > > > > > > > > patches applied. I am now in the process of trying vanilla
> > > > > > > > > > 2.6.33-rc7. If hot-add works with 2.6.33-rc7 I will give
> > > > > > > > > > your patch a try.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The hot-add worked fine with an unpatched 2.6.33-rc7.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Good.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The new patch when added to the 2.6.33-rc7 tree that
> > > > > > > > > included the original patchset unfortunately did not
> > > > > > > > > correct the problem.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Bad.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Well, fortunately I have another one, but I haven't tested it myself yet except
> > > > > > > > for checking that it builds. Hopefully it won't break things more.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The patch below applies on top of 2.6.33-rc7 with my PCI runtime PM patchset
> > > > > > > > applied. Please test it and let me know the results.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry, I sent a wrong version of the patch by mistake, it doesn't even build.
> > > > > > > The correct one is appended.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No problem. I received this message before doing anything with
> > > > > > the previous one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sorry, both hot-add and hot-remove behaviors appear unchanged
> > > > > > with this patch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmm, that's kind of strange. I'm getting suspicious.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I would like to dig into the code and help with the debugging
> > > > > > but I am swamped with other things right now. However, feel
> > > > > > free to continue using me for testing if you have other ideas
> > > > > > you want me to try.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks, of course I have some ideas. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > First, please try to test 2.6.33-rc7 with patches [1/9] - [7/9] applied
> > > > > (ie. without the $subject patch and [9/9]). Let's make sure we're debugging
> > > > > the right patch.
> > > >
> > > > It does look like both the hot-add and hot-remove issues were
> > > > introduced by something in 1/9 through 7/9. I started with a
> > > > clean 2.6.33-rc7 tree and applied only 1/9 through 7/9. I still
> > > > see that lingering blinking amber LED with hot-remove and no
> > > > response from the driver during hot-add.
> > > >
> > > > Now I suppose you want me to start reverting 1/9 through 7/9
> > > > in reverse order to find the culprit. :)
> > >
> > > Actually, I think [6/9] is the offending one, so please try with [1/9] - [5/9]
> > > applied and if that works, please apply [6/9] and retest to confirm it's the
> > > culprit.
> >
> > Yes, 6/9 also appeared to be the most likely suspect to me and
> > I was already doing what you asked except in the opposite order.
> > With 1/9 through 6/9 both the hot-add and hot-remove issues still
> > reproduced. After removing 6/9 both issues disappeared.
>
> Thanks for verifying, I've already started to look for bugs in it.
Thanks!
>
> What's your kernel command line, BTW?
root=/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-35000c5000036ffcb-part7 ip=9.47.66.9:9.47.67.50:9.47.66.1:255.255.254.0 resume=/dev/disk/by-id/scsi-35000c50000370247-part3 crashkernel=256M-:128M console=tty0 console=ttyS0,115200 pci=use_crs pci=norom
Gary
--
Gary Hade
System x Enablement
IBM Linux Technology Center
503-578-4503 IBM T/L: 775-4503
garyhade@us.ibm.com
http://www.ibm.com/linux/ltc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-10 23:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-01-10 13:31 [PATCH 0/9] PCI run-time PM support (rev. 3) Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:35 ` [PATCH 1/9] PCI PM: Add function for checking PME status of devices Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-15 17:55 ` Jesse Barnes
2010-01-10 13:36 ` [PATCH 2/9] PCI PM: PCIe PME root port service driver (rev. 5) Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:37 ` [PATCH 3/9] PCI PM: Make it possible to force using INTx for PCIe PME signaling Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:38 ` [PATCH 4/9] ACPI: Add infrastructure for refcounting GPE consumers Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:39 ` [PATCH 5/9] ACPI: Add support for new refcounted GPE API to drivers Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:40 ` [PATCH 6/9] ACPI: Remove old GPE API and transition code entirely to new one Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 13:48 ` [PATCH 7/9] ACPI / PM: Add more run-time wake-up fields (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 14:01 ` [PATCH 8/9] PCI / ACPI / PM: Platform support for PCI PME wake-up (rev. 7) Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-05 23:57 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-02-06 0:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-06 20:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-08 17:53 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-08 19:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-08 21:12 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-08 21:30 ` [linux-pm] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-08 23:37 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-09 0:53 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-09 12:48 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-09 13:34 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-09 16:41 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-09 17:35 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-09 20:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-09 20:58 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-09 23:31 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-10 1:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-10 1:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-10 17:48 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-10 18:00 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-10 20:38 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-10 21:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-10 22:13 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-10 22:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-10 23:04 ` Gary Hade [this message]
2010-02-10 23:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-11 0:56 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-11 2:07 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-11 13:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-11 18:29 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-11 18:33 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-02-11 20:32 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-11 20:40 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-11 21:56 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-11 22:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-12 1:55 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-12 11:19 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-13 0:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-13 1:27 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-14 13:51 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-02-15 19:22 ` Gary Hade
2010-02-15 21:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2010-01-10 14:02 ` [PATCH 9/9] PCI PM: Run-time callbacks for PCI bus type (rev. 2) Rafael J. Wysocki
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=20100210230438.GC17115@us.ibm.com \
--to=garyhade@us.ibm.com \
--cc=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=mjg@redhat.com \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=robert.moore@intel.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