From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757367AbaHGI7R (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2014 04:59:17 -0400 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:7895 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754072AbaHGI7Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Aug 2014 04:59:16 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.01,816,1400050800"; d="scan'208";a="465978644" Message-ID: <53E33F4D.7080701@intel.com> Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 16:56:45 +0800 From: Lan Tianyu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov CC: "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "toshi.kani@hp.com" , "imammedo@redhat.com" , "jan.kiszka@siemens.com" , "mingo@kernel.org" , "huawei.libin@huawei.com" , "prarit@redhat.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Brandt, Todd E" Subject: Re: [PATCH] X86/CPU: Avoid 100ms sleep for cpu offline during S3 References: <1407142742-29202-1-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <20140804102301.GB4808@pd.tnic> <53E04457.2060507@intel.com> <20140805075419.GA18234@pd.tnic> <53E0A3EE.50708@intel.com> <20140806110748.GC27033@pd.tnic> <4CFBC02C07DA244CA19D6815A05BE6EE0119E1CF@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20140806160652.GD27033@pd.tnic> In-Reply-To: <20140806160652.GD27033@pd.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014年08月07日 00:06, Borislav Petkov wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 01:13:21PM +0000, Lan, Tianyu wrote: >> Have you tried my attached kernel config file? When someone reported >> the issue to me, I also was very hard to reproduce the issue by my >> own config file. Maybe once 100 tries. But I can reproduced the issue >> every time with the attached configure file on several my machines and >> even on server. > > first of all, please do not top-post: > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > Hi Borislav: Sorry. I replied on the Windows machines and ignored the format.I will notice it. Thanks fro reminder. > Now, it looks like the issue is timing-related, depending on when we're > going to see CPU_DEAD, before or after the msleep. Thus, if some distro > config runs more crap on the suspend path and we don't see the CPU_DEAD > before we sleep for 100ms, then we get to wait at least once and it > shows in the suspend trace. > > So, using the completion timeout seems like a net improvement for such > configs and thus for any config. Yes, that's exact. -- Best regards Tianyu Lan