|Summary:||backtraces during hibernate/resume.|
|Product:||Power Management||Reporter:||Alan Jenkins (alan-jenkins)|
|Severity:||normal||CC:||acpi-bugzilla, bunk, rui.zhang, tglx, venki|
|Bug Depends on:|
|Bug Blocks:||7216, 9243|
System log with unrecognised call traces
2.6.25 final kernel config, as tested above
System log for 2.6.25 (as above)
Description Alan Jenkins 2008-03-07 16:01:51 UTC
Latest working kernel version: Ubuntu 2.6.22-14-generic Earliest failing kernel version: 22.214.171.124 (I do have some more I can test easily) Distribution: Ubuntu Hardware Environment: Core 2 Duo Software Environment: - Problem Description: The reported CPU frequency is too low.
Comment 1 Andrew Morton 2008-03-07 16:07:07 UTC
Marked as a regression.
Comment 2 Alan Jenkins 2008-03-07 16:10:37 UTC
alan@singularity:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$ cat scaling_available_frequencies 1067000 800000 alan@singularity:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$ cat /proc/cpuinfo processor : 0 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6420 @ 2.13GHz stepping : 6 cpu MHz : 1067.000 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 0 cpu cores : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm bogomips : 2130.07 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management: processor : 1 vendor_id : GenuineIntel cpu family : 6 model : 15 model name : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6420 @ 2.13GHz stepping : 6 cpu MHz : 800.000 cache size : 4096 KB physical id : 0 siblings : 2 core id : 1 cpu cores : 2 fpu : yes fpu_exception : yes cpuid level : 10 wp : yes flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm bogomips : 2128.08 clflush size : 64 cache_alignment : 64 address sizes : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual power management:
Comment 3 Alan Jenkins 2008-03-07 16:11:45 UTC
alan@singularity:/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq$ cat scaling_driver acpi-cpufreq
Comment 4 Dave Jones 2008-03-07 16:46:30 UTC
please make sure your kernel is compiled with CPU_FREQ_DEBUG=y, and boot with cpufreq.debug=7 This will cause cpufreq to log more information to dmesg on state transitions, which will be useful for diagnosis. It'd also be interesting to know if this is still a problem with the latest -git tree.
Comment 5 Alan Jenkins 2008-03-07 17:22:24 UTC
Sorry, I wasn't entirely honest with you and it looks like I've been wasting your time. I just rebooted and the BIOS messages agreed that the CPU was running at 1Ghz... immediately after claiming it was 8*266, which would give the correct figure (2.13 Ghz). I was able to resolve the issue by turning the machine off at the plug, and then restarting it. I've not been able to reproduce it again. I suspect this was caused by other problems (regressions) I've been having with 126.96.36.199. Hibernation doesn't always power off properly; it hangs long after the disk LED goes out. It resumes successfully though. I also have large numbers of call traces reported, for no apparent reason. I don't recognise them as OOPs or BUGs, though I've seen them being interleaved with soft lockup messages. For completeness, I attach a log which includes two hibernation cycles, after which a number of these unrecognised call traces occur. I don't think I've got the patience to get to the bottom of this, though I'd like to know what the call traces are supposed to be.
Comment 6 Alan Jenkins 2008-03-07 17:25:51 UTC
Created attachment 15176 [details] System log with unrecognised call traces
Comment 7 Alan Jenkins 2008-03-09 06:03:03 UTC
I haven't worked out how to reproduce these call traces. However, I was able to reproduce the hang after suspend to disk on version 2.6.25-rc4. (Again, this apparent hang simply means that the machine does not power off automatically; it will still resume successfully). Sometimes, but not always, this hang is associated with several screenfuls worth of soft lockup warnings (without call traces). I cannot extract these warning messages using "dmesg" or similar - presumably because they happen at an awkward time during system suspend, when the system image has already been "frozen". When I used 2.6.25-rc4 I also experienced at least one spontaneous hang. The last time this happened: i) I watched it for over a minute before rebooting - since the most recent soft-lockup warnings suggested that soft lockup detection had a timeout of 61 seconds. ii) I was able to "soft reboot" the machine, i.e. using the reset button. When it rebooted, the BIOS again claimed that the CPU was running at 1.0Ghz instead of 2.13Ghz. As before, this resolved itself after a "hard reboot", i.e. after unplugging the machine.
Comment 8 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-16 09:56:39 UTC
Can you test that with 2.6.25-rc9 (or 2.6.25 final when it's out), please?
Comment 9 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-16 10:07:31 UTC
I can't right now because I'm in the wrong house. I'll be back on Saturday, so I'll test it then.
Comment 10 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-19 09:09:48 UTC
OK, I retested with 2.6.25 final. I successfully booted and hibernated twice. I am continuing to use the system with 2.6.25 kernel to post this message. As before, both times I hibernated, the system hung (requiring me to press the reset button) after writing the hibernation image. The hard drive LED went out, but the power LED stayed on and the disk/fan noise stayed the same. I couldn't see any console messages because I ran the buggy version of the Intel X driver shipped by Ubuntu. When the distro scripts switch to the console, the screen just goes black. When I checked the system logs, I find that the resume from the *second* hibernation is followed by a busload of these mysterious calltraces. I also checked the CPU frequency after resume and that wasn't affected this time.
Comment 11 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-19 09:10:41 UTC
Created attachment 15820 [details] 2.6.25 final kernel config, as tested above
Comment 12 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-19 09:27:02 UTC
Created attachment 15821 [details] System log for 2.6.25 (as above) This is a complete system log showing the two hibernation cycles above. It includes another spew of mysterious call traces after the second resume. As before, they don't appear to be tagged as being OOPS/BUG/WARN whatever. Attaching directly failed (I emailed the error message to firstname.lastname@example.org as requested). This time I uploaded it on the web and attached it as a URL. It is a large file - 271kb, so that may have been the problem.
Comment 13 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-19 13:09:26 UTC
These call traces apparently are related to a 'less' command. What did you use 'less' for during the hibernation?
Comment 14 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-19 13:35:46 UTC
Heh. Nothing fancy. I was either using it to view /var/log/messages, or dmesg... in order to look for the mysterious call traces. I supppose that's a possible explanation for why they didn't happen until after the second hibernation / resume cycle. I could try hibernating without "less" running if you want. Or I could boot in rescue mode, so there will be just bash running. I don't remember whether I was able to reproduce it in rescue mode though.
Comment 15 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-19 14:13:32 UTC
Well, I'm just wondering why 'less' gave you those symptoms ...
Comment 16 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-19 14:29:05 UTC
The calltraces I have logged here for v188.8.131.52 show up in ksoftirqd/1. I had other processes too (when I was trying to narrow down kernel versions). So my opinion is that it's not significant which process this is happening in. If you look at them side-by-side it looks more like the key features are - apic_timer_interrupt - do_softirq I think that was generally true of the other calltraces I observed, but that there were also a few exceptions.
Comment 17 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-20 12:46:39 UTC
The plot thickens. I bisected this a couple of times and got to 2.6.23-g06489b4e. I tested this kernel by hibernating. It didn't hang and powered off correctly. However, the mysterious calltraces started happening when I resumed. And this time, they didn't stop. I have Intel C2D running at 2.13 Ghz, and according to top, 74-75% of CPU time is being spent in "si" (interrupt?), in klogd and syslogd - reporting these call traces. The good thing about this is that a small number of these call traces appear to identify themselves - as soft-lockup reports: [ 83.758745] [ 83.761587] CPU 1: [ 83.761588] Modules linked in: battery ac thermal fan button i915 drm binfmt_misc ipv6 ppdev container acpi_cpufreq dock cpufreq_stats cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_userspace sbs coretemp it87 hwmon_vid lp snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_hwdep snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi snd_seq_mid3.779319] BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 11s! [swapper:0] [ 83.779321] CPU 1: My guess is that all the calltraces are softlockup reports but that they get corrupted, perhaps because they come so close together. As further evidence that this is mainly related to timer interrupts/softirq - (not the less program :-), all of these call traces are in the idle thread. I'll see if I can suspend the system (to ram) in this state of continuous calltraces. It might be difficult to reproduce, and maybe someone can think of something useful to try while it's doing this? [ 83.758745] [ 83.761587] CPU 1: [ 83.761588] Modules linked in: battery ac thermal fan button i915 drm binfmt_misc ipv6 ppdev container acpi_cpufreq dock cpufreq_stats cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_userspace sbs coretemp it87 hwmon_vid lp snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm [ 83.779321] CPU 1: [ 83.779322] Modules linked in: battery ac thermal fan button i915 drm binfmt_misc ipv6 ppdev container acpi_cpufreq dock cpufreq_stats cpufreq_powersave cpufreq_conservative cpufreq_userspace sbs coretemp it87 hwmon_vid lp snd_hda_intel snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_hwdep snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device sr_mod cdrom serio_raw snd sg parport_pc p arport soundcore psmouse floppy pcspkr af_packet evdev ext3 jbd mbcache sd_mod usbhid hid ata_piix iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support ahci ata_generic ehci_hcd u hci_hcd libata scsi_mod skge usbcore snd_page_alloc intel_agp processor fuse fbcon tileblit font bitblit softcursor [ 83.779353] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.23-g06489b4e #6 [ 83.779354] RIP: 0010:[__do_softirq+84/224] [__do_softirq+84/224] __do_softirq+0x54/0xe0 [ 83.779357] RSP: 0018:ffff810001767f30 EFLAGS: 00000206 [ 83.779359] RAX: 0000000000000002 RBX: ffffffff8054dd00 RCX: 000000001350c53a [ 83.779361] RDX: ffffffffb7f46ce5 RSI: ef39c54939ff773a RDI: 10c63af2c65b84b0 [ 83.779363] RBP: ffff810001767eb0 R08: 0000000016a56cb0 R09: 0000000000000010 [ 83.779364] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: ffffffff802592e0 R12: ffffffff8020ce66 [ 83.779366] R13: ffffffff805b9380 R14: 0000000000000002 R15: 0000000000000001 [ 83.779368] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff810001401300(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 83.779370] CS: 0010 DS: 0018 ES: 0018 CR0: 000000008005003b [ 83.779372] CR2: 00002ace171eb040 CR3: 0000000000201000 CR4: 00000000000006a0 [ 83.779373] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 [ 83.779375] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 [ 83.779377] [ 83.779377] Call Trace: [ 83.779378] <IRQ> [call_softirq+28/48] call_softirq+0x1c/0x30 [ 83.779384] [do_softirq+53/144] do_softirq+0x35/0x90 [ 83.779386] [irq_exit+136/144] irq_exit+0x88/0x90 [ 83.779389] [smp_apic_timer_interrupt+71/112] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x47/0x70 [ 83.779391] [ksoftirqd+0/240] ksoftirqd+0x0/0xf0 [ 83.779394] [apic_timer_interrupt+102/112] apic_timer_interrupt+0x66/0x70 [ 83.779396] <EOI> [lapic_next_event+0/16] lapic_next_event+0x0/0x10 [ 83.779402] [read_tsc+31/48] read_tsc+0x1f/0x30 [ 83.779406] [getnstimeofday+54/144] getnstimeofday+0x36/0x90 [ 83.779409] [ktime_get_ts+30/96] ktime_get_ts+0x1e/0x60 [ 83.779412] [ktime_get+12/80] ktime_get+0xc/0x50 [ 83.779415] [tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick+0/320] tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick+0x0/0x140 [ 83.779418] [tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick+54/320] tick_nohz_restart_sched_tick+0x36/0x140 [ 83.779420] [mwait_idle+0/80] mwait_idle+0x0/0x50 [ 83.779423] [cpu_idle+146/208] cpu_idle+0x92/0xd0 [ 83.779430] Interestingly these calltraces seem to have stopped being written to the system log after the first 217Mb. "tail -f /var/log/messages" has stopped showing anything (there are now a couple of MARKs after the last calltrace), but "top" still shows it hogging the cpu, and "watch -n 0.1 'dmesg|tail'" is still scrolling furiously.
Comment 18 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-20 13:12:04 UTC
Well, the monster didn't like STR (it hung). It's not too difficult to reproduce though. This time I hibernated twice. After the first resume, the calltraces were in thunderbird-bin, and stopped very quickly. On the second resume, the calltraces were in the idle thread again, and they didn't stop. I now have 379 megs of (mostly) calltraces in /var/log/messages and growing. So: 1) I've confirmed the existence of softlockup reports amongst the calltraces. It's not clear cut though - surely you shouldn't get a softlockup report more frequently than once every ten seconds (or whatever the timeout period is)? Yet these are much more frequent than that. 2) When I have time to continue bisection, I'll count the calltraces as "bad". Even if, like 2.6.23-g06489b4e, it doesn't hang after hibernation. The calltraces are bad enough by themselves - garbled, filling the system log, and potentially hogging most of my CPU if they don't stop. Any other ideas would be very much welcome though. I'm feeling out of my depth here.
Comment 19 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-20 13:20:33 UTC
Can you try 2.6.25 with CONFIG_CPU_IDLE unset, please?
Comment 20 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-20 14:06:13 UTC
The first time I tried it, it looked like it had fixed it (it powered off correctly after hibernating), but then X hung on resume. When I tried again, it hung after hibernating (and then resumed successfully). On the other hand, I didn't have calltraces.
Comment 21 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-20 14:16:58 UTC
I spoke to soon. Just after I posted it locked up. I used SysRq keys to reboot. System log captured lots of backtraces, but no lockup messages.
Comment 22 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-20 14:31:17 UTC
Have you tried hibernation in the "shutdown" mode?
Comment 23 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-21 00:36:07 UTC
I think I tried that at some point. I've just tried it now (on the 2.6.25 kernel with CONFIG_CPU_IDLE unset). It hung on hibernation and locked up a minute or so after resume, although it didn't leave any calltraces in /var/log/messages.
Comment 24 Rafael J. Wysocki 2008-04-21 05:55:32 UTC
Please attach the output of acpidump for your system.
Comment 25 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-21 09:56:58 UTC
Sorry, I'm still getting this attachment submission error on Bugzilla. Therefore I upload it to <http://www-student.cs.york.ac.uk/~aj504/acpidump>. You might like to know that this system was affected by Bug 8630. That is, it has null entries in XDST which broke ACPI P-states. The fix was to detect this and fall back to the RSDT, which had usable P-state info. BTW the fix was present in 2.6.23 which is not affected by the current bug. I don't think the XDST fix caused this, just letting you know the acpidump might look a bit odd.
Comment 26 Len Brown 2008-04-21 17:41:49 UTC
any difference when you hibernate after booted with "nosmp" and then boot with "maxcpus=1"?
Comment 27 Len Brown 2008-04-21 17:46:20 UTC
can you clarify what was the latest version that worked and the earliest that failed, and if the fix for bug 8630 was present in either, neither, or both?
Comment 28 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-22 01:02:45 UTC
I am highly confident that 2.6.23 worked and 2.6.24 failed. I checked git and the fix for bug 8630 should be present in 2.6.23 and above. I'm not so sure about my bisection because the nature of the failures is somewhat variable - although it seems straightforward to reproduce. So far I've bisected it down to "300 revisions to test", between v2.6.23-5176-gfe071d7 and v2.6.23-5476-g5c8e191 Which I think means it started failing somewhere during the 2.6.23 merge window.
Comment 29 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-22 01:23:37 UTC
It [the 2.6.25 kernel with CONFIG_CPU_IDLE unset] doesn't work with nosmp. The initrd dumps me at a emergency shell because it can't find the root device. I'm using ahci, so I assume this is the same issue which came up on lkml recently. Excuse my url. <http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/browse_thread/thread/533a7c20f4b75b91/562e42ae6f60207b> I'll retry with nosmp pci=nomsi.
Comment 30 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-22 02:04:31 UTC
If you were asking me to hibernate with "nosmp pci=nosmp" and resume with "maxcpus=1", then it hibernated fine but hung after resume, before switching back to X. But hibernating and resuming with "nosmp pci=nomsi" works great. No hangs or calltraces. The same is true of "maxcpus=1". Thanks for working on this. I'm looking forward to having it fixed.
Comment 31 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-25 06:49:34 UTC
I did some more bisection. Unfortunately I didn't pin down the commit responsible. [It ended with a run of 8 good revisions, which is somewhat improbable. It blamed v2.6.23-2600-g117494a, but checking out that commit and rebuilding it generated a "good" kernel]. Now I still had the "bad" kernel, as "2.6.23-g117494a.old". There was one significant difference between "good" and "bad"; at some point during the bisection CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS had become unset (likely a mistake on my part). I rebuilt again to be sure (to exclude a couple of other config changes which had crept in). v2.6.23-2600-g117494a with a certain config and CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=y is fine. But v2.6.23-2600-g117494a with the exact same config except CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS *unset* is broken. And the same is true of my 2.6.25; it was only broken because I'd built it with a particular configuration. I think the problem is that I left CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS unset but selected CONFIG_NO_HZ=y. If I deselect CONFIG_NO_HZ then there's no problem. CONFIG_NO_HZ was added to x86_64 for 2.6.24, disabled by default, so this isn't a basic regression; it looks more like an unusual new configuration that didn't get hibernation tested. I don't have an alternative x86_64 machine, so it would be great if someone could reproduce on another machine using the "broken" 2.6.25 config I attached earlier. BTW the broken kernel hung after hibernation. It didn't show any calltraces. Though I did notice processes apparently soft-locked in softirqs. (I may not have waited long enough for the lockup detection to trigger). When I resumed, "kicker" (kde panel) was at "9999% CPU" according to top, and 99.9% of CPU time was in state "si" - which I now assume means soft-interrupt. I killed it, and after maybe 30 seconds it went away and I could restart it without problems. I also noticed something new. I started "konqueror" to try and report this. After another half-minute or so, konqueror locked up in exactly the same way as kicker did. So the lockup can affect processes started after resuming from hibernation.
Comment 32 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-25 07:05:09 UTC
Thomas [as hrtimer maintainer]: can you have a look at this please? It took me a while to get down to the problem, but I think CONFIG_NO_HZ without CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS is broken with hibernation on x86_64. The hibernation hangs after writing the image, although it resumes successfully. After resume I get lockups in timer softirqs. The softlockup detector output is confused - maybe because of other time-related problems? Sometimes I get nothing. Sometimes I get floods of calltraces which indicate timer softirqs. Sometimes these calltraces include the occasional soft-lockup warning message, although most of them are bare calltraces - with no BUG, WARN, OOPS or lockup message. These lockups can last long enough that the cpu time spent in softirqs is very visible - with top showing 99.9% time in state "si".
Comment 33 Alan Jenkins 2008-04-25 07:44:53 UTC
Sorry, I forgot one last thing in my summary: The lockups also seem to go away with "maxcpus=1". Also I think the calltraces are always on "CPU1". So, as a wild guess, it might have something to do with the CPU hotplug code used by hibernation.
Comment 34 Zhang Rui 2008-11-20 19:05:15 UTC
does the problem still exist in 2.6.27?
Comment 35 Alan Jenkins 2008-11-21 11:53:14 UTC
No. Sorry, I lost track of the bug. Whatever it was, 2.6.27 can hibernate fine with CONFIG_NO_HZ=y and CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS=n.