Re: High CPU temp, suspend problem - xen 4.1.5-pre, linux 3.7.x

[Marek Marczykowski <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5076 bytes --]

On 28.03.2013 18:41, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 27/03/2013 17:15, Marek Marczykowski wrote:
>> On 27.03.2013 17:56, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 27/03/2013 15:47, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 02:52:14PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>> On 27/03/2013 14:46, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>>> On 27/03/2013 14:31, Marek Marczykowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 27.03.2013 09:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 26.03.13 at 19:50, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> So vector e9 doesn't appear to be programmed in anywhere.
>>>>>>>> Quite obviously, as it's the 8259A vector for IRQ 9. The question
>>>>>>>> really is why an IRQ appears on that vector in the first place. The
>>>>>>>> 8259A resume code _should_ leave all IRQs masked on a fully
>>>>>>>> IO-APIC system (see my question raised yesterday).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that's also why I suggested, for an experiment, to fiddle with
>>>>>>>> the loop exit condition to exclude legacy vectors (which wouldn't
>>>>>>>> be a final solution, but would at least tell us whether the direction
>>>>>>>> is the right one). In the end, besides understanding why an
>>>>>>>> interrupt on vector E9 gets raised at all, we may also need to
>>>>>>>> tweak the IRQ migration logic to not do anything on legacy IRQs,
>>>>>>>> but that would need to happen earlier than in
>>>>>>>> smp_irq_move_cleanup_interrupt(). Considering that 4.3
>>>>>>>> apparently doesn't have this problem, we may need to go hunt for
>>>>>>>> a change that isn't directly connected to this, yet deals with the
>>>>>>>> problem as a side effect (at least I don't recall any particular fix
>>>>>>>> since 4.2). One aspect here is the double mapping of legacy IRQs
>>>>>>>> (once to their IO-APIC vector, and once to their legacy vector,
>>>>>>>> i.e. vector_irq[] having two entries pointing to the same IRQ).
>>>>>>> So tried change loop condition to LAST_DYNAMIC_VECTOR and it doesn't hit that
>>>>>>> BUG/ASSERT. But still it doesn't work - only CPU0 used by scheduler, also some
>>>>>>> errors from dom0 kernel, and errors about PCI devices used by domU(1).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Messages from resume (different tries):
>>>>>>> http://duch.mimuw.edu.pl/~marmarek/qubes/xen-4.1-last-dynamic-vector.log
>>>>>>> http://duch.mimuw.edu.pl/~marmarek/qubes/xen-4.1-last-dynamic-vector2.log
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also one time I've got fatal page fault error, earlier in resume (it isn't
>>>>>>> deterministic):
>>>>>>> http://duch.mimuw.edu.pl/~marmarek/qubes/xen-4.1-resume-page-fault.log
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This pagefault is a Null structure pointer dereference, likely the
>>>>>> scheduling data.  At a first glance, it looks related to the assertion
>>>>>> failures I have been seeing sporadically in testing, but unable to
>>>>>> reproduce reliably.  There seems to be something quite dodgy with
>>>>>> interaction of vcpu_wake and scheduling loops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The other logs indicate that dom0 appears to have a domain id of 1,
>>>>>> which is sure to cause problems.
>>>>> Actually - ignore this
>>>>>
>>>>> >From the log,
>>>>>
>>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:153: dom0: can't create irq for msi!
>>>>> [  113.637037] xhci_hcd 0000:03:00.0: xen map irq failed -22 for 32752
>>>>> domain
>>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:153: dom0: can't create irq for msi!
>>>>> [  113.657911] xhci_hcd 0000:03:00.0: xen map irq failed -22 for 32752
>>>>> domain
>>>>>
>>>>> and later
>>>>>
>>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:153: dom1: can't create irq for msi!
>>>>> [  121.909814] pciback 0000:00:19.0: xen map irq failed -22 for 1 domain
>>>>> [  121.954080] error enable msi for guest 1 status ffffffea
>>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:153: dom1: can't create irq for msi!
>>>>> [  122.035355] pciback 0000:00:19.0: xen map irq failed -22 for 1 domain
>>>>> [  122.044421] error enable msi for guest 1 status ffffffea
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that there is a separate bug where mapped irqs are not unmapped
>>>>> on the suspend path.
>>>> You thinking this is a Linux (xen irq machinery) issue? Meaning it should
>>>> end up calling PHYSDEV_unmap_pirq as part of the suspend process?
>>> I am not sure.  Without looking at the code, I am only speculating.
>>>
>>> Beyond that, the main question is about the expected behaviour.  Do we
>>> expect dom0/U to unmap its irqs and remap them after resume?  What do we
>>> expect from domains which are unaware of the host sleep action?
>> BTW this is the case: domain 1 isn't fully aware of sleep. It have some PCI
>> devices assigned. The only action taken there before suspend is shutdown
>> network interfaces (without this system hanged during suspend).
>>
> 
> What do you mean here by shutting down the network interfaces? Are the
> devices being assigned back to dom0?  

No, just simple ip link set eth0 down. Seems to be enough to suspend succeed,
at least on most hardware...

> Ifso, is dom0 assigning them back
> to domU before the domU driver tries to set itself up?

-- 
Best Regards / Pozdrawiam,
Marek Marczykowski
Invisible Things Lab


[-- Attachment #1.2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 553 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel