Re: 3.12: kernel panic when resuming from suspend to RAM (x86_64)

Francis Moreau
2013-12-01T10:10:43Z

On 11/30/2013 09:17 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Saturday, November 30, 2013 04:07:36 PM Francis Moreau wrote:
>> Hello Thomas,
>>
>> Sorry for the delay.
>>
>> On 11/29/2013 10:02 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 29 Nov 2013, Francis Moreau wrote:
>>>> Since it seems to be related to rtsx driver or its upper layer, could
>>>> the folks involved in this area have a look to this issue please ?
>>>
>>> I'm not involved, but looking at the debug objects backtrace it's
>>> related to the delayed work in rtsx.
>>>
>>> Does the untested patch below cure the issue?
>>>
>>
>> It seems it does since I can't see the debug object trace anymore
>> however Ican see this now:
>
> So Thomas' patch should be applied to the rtsx driver.
>
>> [ 64.498270] irq 16: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option)
>> [ 64.498314] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 3.11.0-rc2-ARCH #65
>> [ 64.498316] Hardware name: CLEVO CO. W55xEU
>> /W55xEU , BIOS 4.6.5
>> 03/05/2013
>> [ 64.498317] ffff8804078bd38c ffff88041e203e48 ffffffff81459fe9
>> ffff8804078bd300
>> [ 64.498320] ffff88041e203e70 ffffffff810d8632 ffff8804078bd300
>> 0000000000000010
>> [ 64.498322] 0000000000000000 ffff88041e203eb0 ffffffff810d8a58
>> ffffffff8136a882
>> [ 64.498324] Call Trace:
>> [ 64.498325] <IRQ> [<ffffffff81459fe9>] dump_stack+0x54/0x8d
>> [ 64.498334] [<ffffffff810d8632>] __report_bad_irq+0x32/0xd0
>> [ 64.498337] [<ffffffff810d8a58>] note_interrupt+0x138/0x1f0
>> [ 64.498340] [<ffffffff8136a882>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0x52/0xc0
>> [ 64.498343] [<ffffffff810d6439>] handle_irq_event_percpu+0xf9/0x250
>> [ 64.498345] [<ffffffff810d65cd>] handle_irq_event+0x3d/0x60
>> [ 64.498347] [<ffffffff810d95ca>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0x5a/0x100
>> [ 64.498350] [<ffffffff81004a6e>] handle_irq+0x1e/0x30
>> [ 64.498353] [<ffffffff8146aafd>] do_IRQ+0x4d/0xc0
>> [ 64.498355] [<ffffffff8146116d>] common_interrupt+0x6d/0x6d
>> [ 64.498356] <EOI> [<ffffffff8136a882>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0x52/0xc0
>> [ 64.498360] [<ffffffff8136a878>] ? cpuidle_enter_state+0x48/0xc0
>> [ 64.498362] [<ffffffff8136a9b9>] cpuidle_idle_call+0xc9/0x280
>> [ 64.498365] [<ffffffff8100bf6e>] arch_cpu_idle+0xe/0x30
>> [ 64.498368] [<ffffffff810a1287>] cpu_startup_entry+0x257/0x2d0
>> [ 64.498370] [<ffffffff8144d404>] rest_init+0x84/0x90
>> [ 64.498373] [<ffffffff818d9ee1>] start_kernel+0x414/0x420
>> [ 64.498375] [<ffffffff818d98d6>] ? repair_env_string+0x5c/0x5c
>> [ 64.498377] [<ffffffff818d9120>] ? early_idt_handlers+0x120/0x120
>> [ 64.498379] [<ffffffff818d95be>] x86_64_start_reservations+0x2a/0x2c
>> [ 64.498381] [<ffffffff818d96c8>] x86_64_start_kernel+0x108/0x117
>> [ 64.498382] handlers:
>> [ 64.498402] [<ffffffffa00168f0>] usb_hcd_irq [usbcore]
>> [ 64.498422] Disabling IRQ #16
>>
>> So I don't think it completely solve the problem but it's a good start.
>
> That issue may or may not be related.
>
> If your system survives resume (I guess it does?),

my system survives resume as soon as the DEBUG_OBJECTS facility was
activated.

> can you please send
> /proc/interrupts before and after the first suspend/resume cycle?
>

Sure, I will do later in the day.

Thanks for your help.