Bug 24882
Summary: | PM/Hibernate: Memory corruption patch introduces regression (2.6.36.2) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Power Management | Reporter: | akwatts |
Component: | Hibernation/Suspend | Assignee: | power-management_other |
Status: | CLOSED UNREPRODUCIBLE | ||
Severity: | high | CC: | florian, hughd, maciej.rutecki, rjw |
Priority: | P1 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Kernel Version: | 2.6.36.2 | Subsystem: | |
Regression: | Yes | Bisected commit-id: | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 7216, 21782 |
Description
akwatts
2010-12-14 04:00:31 UTC
What platform is this? Do you use the built-in hibernation or s2disk? BTW, is the problem 100% reproducible? Also, can you check if the problem is reproducible with the current mainline kernel, please? *ping* I wonder if this commit helps: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=2e725a065b0153f0c449318da1923a120477633d Excuse the delay, illness kept me away. This has turned out to be a very difficult problem to intelligently diagnose (at least for me) because of my inability to systematically reproduce. So to answer your first question above, it is *not* 100% reproducible. To answer your second question, the method I use is internal hibernation (i.e. echo disk > /sys/power/state) It also doesn't seem related to memory load since the hangs on resume can occur if I hibernate just after starting X (with minimal load on RAM) or after starting lots of memory intensive applications in 4 virtual desktops. Breakdown of problem by kernel version: 2.6.35.2 NO PROBLEMS 2.6.36.1 NO PROBLEMS* 2.6.36.2 PROBLEMS 2.6.36.2 (w/o commit 53e87163) NO PROBLEMS 2.6.37-2.6.37.2 NO PROBLEMS* *I did not do as much testing on these as with the 2.6.35 branch but I have not been able to trigger a resume hang yet. By the way, I noticed an incredible speed improvement in both the snapshot generation/saving and the resumption from hibernation as of 2.6.37. Congratulations; it is now a bit painful to go back to the .36 branch. I will try the commit mentioned above but I noticed that was introduced in 2.6.37.2 and both 2.6.37 and 2.6.37.1 seem to be OK (tough to say for sure on 2.6.37.1 since I only had it on my system for a short time). Is it still worth testing this particular commit given this information? Also, I do not envision returning to the 2.6.36.x branch since so far 2.6.37.x is working great. So, my personal stake in the bug is reduced but I am quite willing to continue helping to debug for the benefit of others. Please let me know how best to proceed. Thanks. ~ Andy 2.6.36.y is EOL now, so if the bug is not visible in 2.6.37.y any more, I'm closing this entry as "unreproducible". |