From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753157AbZIVXfe (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:35:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752979AbZIVXfd (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:35:33 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f210.google.com ([209.85.218.210]:56644 "EHLO mail-bw0-f210.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752969AbZIVXfd (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:35:33 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=a9UBDykauSoXpwlfyJA2A7Zcg6uIh3fXrXzSp+zy8hW2qtfUy53NfkaoPJZzTTWY4X IzzALKVL3ZDb0+KIkFRfNlug9YpcBkSDvnKh7egzknvsCp5mMtCZBVlrVxMch2sCcQnO 6Qgw0mTkiYg3N8aX8K9V5XaRFZGRwSihm5pEM= Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:35:31 +0200 From: Karol Lewandowski To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: david.graham@intel.com, Karol Lewandowski , "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [BUG 2.6.30+] e100 sometimes causes oops during resume Message-ID: <20090922233531.GA3198@bizet.domek.prywatny> References: <20090915120538.GA26806@bizet.domek.prywatny> <200909170118.53965.rjw@sisk.pl> <4AB29F4A.3030102@intel.com> <200909180027.37387.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200909180027.37387.rjw@sisk.pl> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:27:37AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday 17 September 2009, Graham, David wrote: > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > I guess the driver releases its DMA buffer during suspend and attempts to > > > allocate it back on resume, which is not really smart (if that really is the > > > case). > > Yes, we free a 70KB block (0x80 by 0x230 bytes) on suspend and > > reallocate on resume, and so that's an Order 5 request. It looks > > symmetric, and hasn't changed for years. I don't think we are leaking > > memory, which points back to that the memory is too fragmented to > > satisfy the request. > > > > I also concur that Rafael's commit 6905b1f1 shouldn't change the logic > > in the driver for systems with e100 (like yours Karol) that could > > already sleep, and I don't see anything else in the driver that looks to > > be relevant. I'm expecting that your test result without commit 6905b1f1 > > will still show the problem. > > > > So I wonder if this new issue may be triggered by some other change in > > the memory subsystem ? > I think so. There have been reports about order 2 allocations failing for > 2.6.31, so it looks like newer kernels are more likely to expose such problems. > > Adding linux-mm to the CC list. I've hit this bug 2 times since my last email. Is there anything I could do? Maybe I should revert following commits (chosen somewhat randomly)? 1. 49255c619fbd482d704289b5eb2795f8e3b7ff2e 2. dd5d241ea955006122d76af88af87de73fec25b4 - alters changes made by commit above Any ideas? Thanks. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail144.messagelabs.com (mail144.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.51]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 37BA66B005C for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 19:35:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by bwz24 with SMTP id 24so183587bwz.38 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2009 16:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:35:31 +0200 From: Karol Lewandowski Subject: Re: [BUG 2.6.30+] e100 sometimes causes oops during resume Message-ID: <20090922233531.GA3198@bizet.domek.prywatny> References: <20090915120538.GA26806@bizet.domek.prywatny> <200909170118.53965.rjw@sisk.pl> <4AB29F4A.3030102@intel.com> <200909180027.37387.rjw@sisk.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200909180027.37387.rjw@sisk.pl> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: david.graham@intel.com, Karol Lewandowski , "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton List-ID: On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:27:37AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday 17 September 2009, Graham, David wrote: > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > I guess the driver releases its DMA buffer during suspend and attempts to > > > allocate it back on resume, which is not really smart (if that really is the > > > case). > > Yes, we free a 70KB block (0x80 by 0x230 bytes) on suspend and > > reallocate on resume, and so that's an Order 5 request. It looks > > symmetric, and hasn't changed for years. I don't think we are leaking > > memory, which points back to that the memory is too fragmented to > > satisfy the request. > > > > I also concur that Rafael's commit 6905b1f1 shouldn't change the logic > > in the driver for systems with e100 (like yours Karol) that could > > already sleep, and I don't see anything else in the driver that looks to > > be relevant. I'm expecting that your test result without commit 6905b1f1 > > will still show the problem. > > > > So I wonder if this new issue may be triggered by some other change in > > the memory subsystem ? > I think so. There have been reports about order 2 allocations failing for > 2.6.31, so it looks like newer kernels are more likely to expose such problems. > > Adding linux-mm to the CC list. I've hit this bug 2 times since my last email. Is there anything I could do? Maybe I should revert following commits (chosen somewhat randomly)? 1. 49255c619fbd482d704289b5eb2795f8e3b7ff2e 2. dd5d241ea955006122d76af88af87de73fec25b4 - alters changes made by commit above Any ideas? Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org