2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message contains a list of some regressions from 2.6.32,
for which there are no fixes in the mainline known to the tracking team.
If any of them have been fixed already, please let us know.

If you know of any other unresolved regressions from 2.6.32, please let us
know either and we'll add them to the list.  Also, please let us know
if any of the entries below are invalid.

Each entry from the list will be sent additionally in an automatic reply
to this message with CCs to the people involved in reporting and handling
the issue.


Listed regressions statistics:

  Date          Total  Pending  Unresolved
  ----------------------------------------
  2010-02-15      112       34          31
  2010-02-07       97       27          20
  2010-02-01       85       26          21
  2010-01-24       75       29          23
  2010-01-10       55       33          21
  2009-12-29       36       34          27


Unresolved regressions
----------------------

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
Subject		: 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit
Submitter	: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
Date		: 2010-02-14 16:40 (1 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921
Message-ID	: <20100214164023.GA2726@jm.kir.nu>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616751807902&w=4
Handled-By	: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15307
Subject		: irq11: nobody cared, during yenta registration
Submitter	: Meelis Roos <mroos@ut.ee>
Date		: 2010-02-14 15:32 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <alpine.SOC.1.00.1002141720120.679@math.ut.ee>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616327302771&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15306
Subject		: Filesystem I/O is CPU-bound
Submitter	: James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>
Date		: 2010-02-14 3:11 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <m3pr48bjfg.fsf@lugabout.jhcloos.org>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126611738629349&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15305
Subject		: Dell video dies when booting
Submitter	: David Ronis <ronis@ronispc.chem.mcgill.ca>
Date		: 2010-02-14 1:07 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <1266109622.11290.10.camel@montroll.chem.mcgill.ca>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126611098225127&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15292
Subject		: Laptop reboots instead of resume from suspend with any kernel after 2.6.31
Submitter	: Dave Morgan <davemorgan353@btinternet.com>
Date		: 2010-02-13 13:11 (2 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15289
Subject		: Regression 2.6.32 -> 2.6.33, Kernel needs a helping key to boot :)
Submitter	: Asbjørn Sannes <kernelbugzilla@sannes.org>
Date		: 2010-02-12 19:47 (3 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/73472a46b5b28116b145fb5fc05242c1aa8e1461


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
Subject		: RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
Submitter	: Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
Date		: 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15278
Subject		: lockdep warning for iscsi in 2.6.33-rc6
Submitter	: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
Date		: 2010-02-09 6:59 (6 days old)
Message-ID	: <4B7107CF.3060703@oracle.com>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126569884330200&w=2


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15277
Subject		: 2.6.33-rc6 crashes on resume
Submitter	: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@roadwarrior3.tmr.com>
Date		: 2010-02-08 23:03 (7 days old)
Message-ID	: <4B70982F.8090208@roadwarrior3.tmr.com>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126567021801935&w=2
Handled-By	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15276
Subject		: latest git kernel: general protection fault: 0000 [#1]
Submitter	: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
Date		: 2010-02-09 8:36 (6 days old)
Message-ID	: <20100209083605.GA1766@arch.tripp.de>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126570498804223&w=2


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani@redhat.com>
Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15259
Subject		: Corruption with OpenGL since Intel's big DRM push on i945
Submitter	: Alexandre <papouta@hotmail.com>
Date		: 2010-02-08 13:19 (7 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/76446cac68568fc7f5168a27deaf803ed22a4360


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15246
Subject		: BUG: Bad page state in process portageq
Submitter	: Johannes Hirte <johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de>
Date		: 2010-02-07 0:45 (8 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126550356515887&w=2


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15245
Subject		: [2.6.33-rc6 Weird JCPU times?
Submitter	: Shawn Starr <shawn.starr@rogers.com>
Date		: 2010-02-06 7:24 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126544107816889&w=2


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15244
Subject		: PROBLEM: hda-intel divide by zero kernel crash in azx_position_ok()
Submitter	: Jody Bruchon <jody@nctritech.com>
Date		: 2010-02-06 0:32 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126541276028173&w=2
Handled-By	: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
		  Jody Bruchon <jody@nctritech.com>


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15207
Subject		: Pineview - only cursor on black screen visible, "GPU hung" in dmesg
Submitter	: Christian Friedemann <dawn2k@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-02-01 20:15 (14 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15202
Subject		: lockdep warning during elevator_switch
Submitter	: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
Date		: 2010-01-31 23:55 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126498212613051&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15200
Subject		: NFS problems in 2.6.33-rc6: Unknown error 526
Submitter	: J.A. Magallón <jamagallon@ono.com>
Date		: 2010-01-31 22:46 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126497800408928&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15192
Subject		: netperf ~50% regression with 2.6.33-rc1, bisect to 1b9508f
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Date		: 2010-01-25 10:03 (21 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/1b9508f6831e10d53256825de8904caa22d1ca2c
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126441481427331&w=4
Handled-By	: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
		  Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
Subject		: Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
Submitter	: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15142
Subject		: sysfs-related lockdep warning in __blkdev_get
Submitter	: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio--kernel-bugzilla@zmailer.org>
Date		: 2010-01-25 13:38 (21 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15139
Subject		: e1000: transmit queue 0 timed out
Submitter	: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-23 15:37 (23 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=126426149306083&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15114
Subject		: X.org hang with [drm:i915_gem_do_execbuffer] *ERROR* in dmesg
Submitter	: Matej Laitl <strohel@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-23 19:54 (23 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15076
Subject		: System panic under load with clockevents_program_event
Submitter	: okias <d.okias@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-17 13:03 (29 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman@rm.pp.ru>
Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15036
Subject		: soft lockup in dmesg after suspend/resume
Submitter	: ykzhao <yakui.zhao@intel.com>
Date		: 2010-01-04 5:36 (42 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126258356202722&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15025
Subject		: Oops in ext4 driver
Submitter	: Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
Date		: 2010-01-10 13:09 (36 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14950
Subject		: tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Date		: 2009-12-25 11:11 (52 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126174044213172&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937
Subject		: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2830
Submitter	: Grant Wilson <grant.wilson@zen.co.uk>
Date		: 2009-12-27 13:35 (50 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126192220404829&w=4


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Subject		: Misdetection of the TV output
Submitter	: Santi <santi@agolina.net>
Date		: 2009-12-12 13:28 (65 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/27dfaf4f5825a119305db1bc63bef30ed400e376
Handled-By	: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@intel.com>


Regressions with patches
------------------------

Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
Subject		: KMS broken on Intel 855GM broken with 2.6.32/33
Submitter	: Michal Nowak <mnowak@redhat.com>
Date		: 2010-02-07 09:59 (8 days old)
Handled-By	: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/78947/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15039
Subject		: leds_alix2: can't allocate I/O for GPIO
Submitter	: Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
Date		: 2010-01-07 10:26 (39 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126286001106257&w=4
Handled-By	: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/72006/


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (51 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/


For details, please visit the bug entries and follow the links given in
references.

As you can see, there is a Bugzilla entry for each of the listed regressions.
There also is a Bugzilla entry used for tracking the regressions from 2.6.32,
unresolved as well as resolved, at:

http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14885

Please let the tracking team know if there are any Bugzilla entries that
should be added to the list in there.

Thanks!

[Bug #14792] Misdetection of the TV output

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Subject		: Misdetection of the TV output
Submitter	: Santi <santi@agolina.net>
Date		: 2009-12-12 13:28 (65 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/27dfaf4f5825a119305db1bc63bef30ed400e376
Handled-By	: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@intel.com>

[Bug #14792] Misdetection of the TV output

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14792
Subject		: Misdetection of the TV output
Submitter	: Santi <santi-wpr36wD7VxHR7s880joybQ@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2009-12-12 13:28 (65 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/27dfaf4f5825a119305db1bc63bef30ed400e376
Handled-By	: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

[Bug #14937] WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2830

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937
Subject		: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2830
Submitter	: Grant Wilson <grant.wilson@zen.co.uk>
Date		: 2009-12-27 13:35 (50 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126192220404829&w=4

[Bug #15025] Oops in ext4 driver

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15025
Subject		: Oops in ext4 driver
Submitter	: Steinar H. Gunderson <sgunderson@bigfoot.com>
Date		: 2010-01-10 13:09 (36 days old)

[Bug #14950] tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14950
Subject		: tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Date		: 2009-12-25 11:11 (52 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126174044213172&w=4

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (51 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

[Bug #15036] soft lockup in dmesg after suspend/resume

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15036
Subject		: soft lockup in dmesg after suspend/resume
Submitter	: ykzhao <yakui.zhao@intel.com>
Date		: 2010-01-04 5:36 (42 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126258356202722&w=4

[Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)

[Bug #14937] WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2830

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14937
Subject		: WARNING: at kernel/lockdep.c:2830
Submitter	: Grant Wilson <grant.wilson-1HOZaDBbGgxaa/9Udqfwiw@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2009-12-27 13:35 (50 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126192220404829&w=4

[Bug #14950] tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14950
Subject		: tbench regression with 2.6.33-rc1
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2009-12-25 11:11 (52 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126174044213172&w=4

[Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)

[Bug #15036] soft lockup in dmesg after suspend/resume

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15036
Subject		: soft lockup in dmesg after suspend/resume
Submitter	: ykzhao <yakui.zhao-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-04 5:36 (42 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126258356202722&w=4

[Bug #15044] Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman@rm.pp.ru>
Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b

[Bug #15114] X.org hang with [drm:i915_gem_do_execbuffer] *ERROR* in dmesg

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15114
Subject		: X.org hang with [drm:i915_gem_do_execbuffer] *ERROR* in dmesg
Submitter	: Matej Laitl <strohel@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-23 19:54 (23 days old)

[Bug #15076] System panic under load with clockevents_program_event

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15076
Subject		: System panic under load with clockevents_program_event
Submitter	: okias <d.okias@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-17 13:03 (29 days old)

[Bug #15039] leds_alix2: can't allocate I/O for GPIO

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15039
Subject		: leds_alix2: can't allocate I/O for GPIO
Submitter	: Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
Date		: 2010-01-07 10:26 (39 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126286001106257&w=4
Handled-By	: Daniel Mack <daniel@caiaq.de>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/72006/

[Bug #15039] leds_alix2: can't allocate I/O for GPIO

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15039
Subject		: leds_alix2: can't allocate I/O for GPIO
Submitter	: Arnd Hannemann <hannemann-JasiFyN5vQG662+jY7v6MhvVK+yQ3ZXh@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-07 10:26 (39 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126286001106257&w=4
Handled-By	: Daniel Mack <daniel-rDUAYElUppE@public.gmane.org>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/72006/

[Bug #15142] sysfs-related lockdep warning in __blkdev_get

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15142
Subject		: sysfs-related lockdep warning in __blkdev_get
Submitter	: Matti Aarnio <matti.aarnio--kernel-bugzilla@zmailer.org>
Date		: 2010-01-25 13:38 (21 days old)

[Bug #15139] e1000: transmit queue 0 timed out

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15139
Subject		: e1000: transmit queue 0 timed out
Submitter	: Alexander Beregalov <a.beregalov@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-23 15:37 (23 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=126426149306083&w=4

[Bug #15192] netperf ~50% regression with 2.6.33-rc1, bisect to 1b9508f

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15192
Subject		: netperf ~50% regression with 2.6.33-rc1, bisect to 1b9508f
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Date		: 2010-01-25 10:03 (21 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/1b9508f6831e10d53256825de8904caa22d1ca2c
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126441481427331&w=4
Handled-By	: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
		  Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>

[Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
Subject		: Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
Submitter	: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)

[Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
Subject		: Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
Submitter	: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)

[Bug #15192] netperf ~50% regression with 2.6.33-rc1, bisect to 1b9508f

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15192
Subject		: netperf ~50% regression with 2.6.33-rc1, bisect to 1b9508f
Submitter	: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-25 10:03 (21 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/1b9508f6831e10d53256825de8904caa22d1ca2c
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126441481427331&w=4
Handled-By	: Mike Galbraith <efault-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
		  Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>

[Bug #15200] NFS problems in 2.6.33-rc6: Unknown error 526

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15200
Subject		: NFS problems in 2.6.33-rc6: Unknown error 526
Submitter	: J.A. Magallón <jamagallon@ono.com>
Date		: 2010-01-31 22:46 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126497800408928&w=4

[Bug #15202] lockdep warning during elevator_switch

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15202
Subject		: lockdep warning during elevator_switch
Submitter	: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>
Date		: 2010-01-31 23:55 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126498212613051&w=4

[Bug #15202] lockdep warning during elevator_switch

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15202
Subject		: lockdep warning during elevator_switch
Submitter	: Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins-IWqWACnzNjwqdlJmJB21zg@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-31 23:55 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126498212613051&w=4

[Bug #15200] NFS problems in 2.6.33-rc6: Unknown error 526

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15200
Subject		: NFS problems in 2.6.33-rc6: Unknown error 526
Submitter	: J.A. Magallón <jamagallon-sh/6fXdz2Rs@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-01-31 22:46 (15 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126497800408928&w=4

[Bug #15246] BUG: Bad page state in process portageq

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15246
Subject		: BUG: Bad page state in process portageq
Submitter	: Johannes Hirte <johannes.hirte@fem.tu-ilmenau.de>
Date		: 2010-02-07 0:45 (8 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126550356515887&w=2

[Bug #15207] Pineview - only cursor on black screen visible, "GPU hung" in dmesg

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15207
Subject		: Pineview - only cursor on black screen visible, "GPU hung" in dmesg
Submitter	: Christian Friedemann <dawn2k@gmail.com>
Date		: 2010-02-01 20:15 (14 days old)

[Bug #15244] PROBLEM: hda-intel divide by zero kernel crash in azx_position_ok()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15244
Subject		: PROBLEM: hda-intel divide by zero kernel crash in azx_position_ok()
Submitter	: Jody Bruchon <jody@nctritech.com>
Date		: 2010-02-06 0:32 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126541276028173&w=2
Handled-By	: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
		  Jody Bruchon <jody@nctritech.com>

[Bug #15245] [2.6.33-rc6 Weird JCPU times?

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15245
Subject		: [2.6.33-rc6 Weird JCPU times?
Submitter	: Shawn Starr <shawn.starr@rogers.com>
Date		: 2010-02-06 7:24 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126544107816889&w=2

[Bug #15244] PROBLEM: hda-intel divide by zero kernel crash in azx_position_ok()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15244
Subject		: PROBLEM: hda-intel divide by zero kernel crash in azx_position_ok()
Submitter	: Jody Bruchon <jody-CwlhuK3P8e+1Z/+hSey0Gg@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-06 0:32 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126541276028173&w=2
Handled-By	: Takashi Iwai <tiwai-l3A5Bk7waGM@public.gmane.org>
		  Jody Bruchon <jody-CwlhuK3P8e+1Z/+hSey0Gg@public.gmane.org>

[Bug #15245] [2.6.33-rc6 Weird JCPU times?

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15245
Subject		: [2.6.33-rc6 Weird JCPU times?
Submitter	: Shawn Starr <shawn.starr-bJEeYj9oJeDQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-06 7:24 (9 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126544107816889&w=2

[Bug #15248] KMS broken on Intel 855GM broken with 2.6.32/33

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
Subject		: KMS broken on Intel 855GM broken with 2.6.32/33
Submitter	: Michal Nowak <mnowak@redhat.com>
Date		: 2010-02-07 09:59 (8 days old)
Handled-By	: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/78947/

[Bug #15259] Corruption with OpenGL since Intel's big DRM push on i945

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15259
Subject		: Corruption with OpenGL since Intel's big DRM push on i945
Submitter	: Alexandre <papouta@hotmail.com>
Date		: 2010-02-08 13:19 (7 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/76446cac68568fc7f5168a27deaf803ed22a4360

[Bug #15248] KMS broken on Intel 855GM broken with 2.6.32/33

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15248
Subject		: KMS broken on Intel 855GM broken with 2.6.32/33
Submitter	: Michal Nowak <mnowak-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-07 09:59 (8 days old)
Handled-By	: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes-Y1mF5jBUw70BENJcbMCuUQ@public.gmane.org>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/78947/

[Bug #15276] latest git kernel: general protection fault: 0000 [#1]

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15276
Subject		: latest git kernel: general protection fault: 0000 [#1]
Submitter	: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de>
Date		: 2010-02-09 8:36 (6 days old)
Message-ID	: <20100209083605.GA1766@arch.tripp.de>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126570498804223&w=2

[Bug #15273] Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani@redhat.com>
Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)

[Bug #15278] lockdep warning for iscsi in 2.6.33-rc6

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15278
Subject		: lockdep warning for iscsi in 2.6.33-rc6
Submitter	: Tao Ma <tao.ma@oracle.com>
Date		: 2010-02-09 6:59 (6 days old)
Message-ID	: <4B7107CF.3060703@oracle.com>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126569884330200&w=2

[Bug #15277] 2.6.33-rc6 crashes on resume

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15277
Subject		: 2.6.33-rc6 crashes on resume
Submitter	: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@roadwarrior3.tmr.com>
Date		: 2010-02-08 23:03 (7 days old)
Message-ID	: <4B70982F.8090208@roadwarrior3.tmr.com>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126567021801935&w=2
Handled-By	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>

[Bug #15289] Regression 2.6.32 -> 2.6.33, Kernel needs a helping key to boot :)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15289
Subject		: Regression 2.6.32 -> 2.6.33, Kernel needs a helping key to boot :)
Submitter	: Asbjørn Sannes <kernelbugzilla@sannes.org>
Date		: 2010-02-12 19:47 (3 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/73472a46b5b28116b145fb5fc05242c1aa8e1461

[Bug #15287] RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
Subject		: RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
Submitter	: Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
Date		: 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)

[Bug #15277] 2.6.33-rc6 crashes on resume

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15277
Subject		: 2.6.33-rc6 crashes on resume
Submitter	: Bill Davidsen <davidsen-qP6l2Dk72c6WAI/I2fU3s1aTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-08 23:03 (7 days old)
Message-ID	: <4B70982F.8090208-qP6l2Dk72c6WAI/I2fU3s1aTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126567021801935&w=2
Handled-By	: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>

[Bug #15289] Regression 2.6.32 -> 2.6.33, Kernel needs a helping key to boot :)

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15289
Subject		: Regression 2.6.32 -> 2.6.33, Kernel needs a helping key to boot :)
Submitter	: Asbj√∏rn Sannes <kernelbugzilla-8p7wLbfn+Bodnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-12 19:47 (3 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/73472a46b5b28116b145fb5fc05242c1aa8e1461

[Bug #15306] Filesystem I/O is CPU-bound

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15306
Subject		: Filesystem I/O is CPU-bound
Submitter	: James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com>
Date		: 2010-02-14 3:11 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <m3pr48bjfg.fsf@lugabout.jhcloos.org>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126611738629349&w=4

[Bug #15305] Dell video dies when booting

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15305
Subject		: Dell video dies when booting
Submitter	: David Ronis <ronis@ronispc.chem.mcgill.ca>
Date		: 2010-02-14 1:07 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <1266109622.11290.10.camel@montroll.chem.mcgill.ca>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126611098225127&w=4

[Bug #15308] 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
Subject		: 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit
Submitter	: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
Date		: 2010-02-14 16:40 (1 days old)
First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921
Message-ID	: <20100214164023.GA2726@jm.kir.nu>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616751807902&w=4
Handled-By	: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>

[Bug #15292] Laptop reboots instead of resume from suspend with any kernel after 2.6.31

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15292
Subject		: Laptop reboots instead of resume from suspend with any kernel after 2.6.31
Submitter	: Dave Morgan <davemorgan353@btinternet.com>
Date		: 2010-02-13 13:11 (2 days old)

[Bug #15307] irq11: nobody cared, during yenta registration

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15307
Subject		: irq11: nobody cared, during yenta registration
Submitter	: Meelis Roos <mroos@ut.ee>
Date		: 2010-02-14 15:32 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <alpine.SOC.1.00.1002141720120.679@math.ut.ee>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616327302771&w=4

[Bug #15292] Laptop reboots instead of resume from suspend with any kernel after 2.6.31

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15292
Subject		: Laptop reboots instead of resume from suspend with any kernel after 2.6.31
Submitter	: Dave Morgan <davemorgan353-FhtRXb7CoQBt1OO0OYaSVA@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-13 13:11 (2 days old)

[Bug #15307] irq11: nobody cared, during yenta registration

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15307
Subject		: irq11: nobody cared, during yenta registration
Submitter	: Meelis Roos <mroos-HgUWewaQDNA@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2010-02-14 15:32 (1 days old)
Message-ID	: <alpine.SOC.1.00.1002141720120.679-ptEonEWSGqKptlylMvRsHA@public.gmane.org>
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616327302771&w=4

Re: [Bug #15044] Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2

[Mike Galbraith]

On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 00:38 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
> Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
> Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman@rm.pp.ru>
> Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
> First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b

I don't know that this should be carried as a regression.

Yes, the code in question increases cross cpu wakeups, but that's the
entire point.  If there is any overlap in execution larger than the cost
of running a scheduler on another core, that time can be converted to
throughput.

Tip AF_UNIX lmbench numbers show that throughput gain being realized,
TCP numbers below that (x) show what can be had for apps which do a lot
of what that microbenchmark does, given a tiny enabler patchlet.

*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
                             UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2853 2923 1132 2829.3 4761.9 1235.0 1234.4 4472 1683.
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2839 2921 1141 2846.5 4779.8 1242.5 1235.9 4455 1684.
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2838 2935 751. 2838.5 4820.0 1243.6 1235.0 4472 1684.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3057 5166 859. 2760.2 4827.8 1481.1 1466.1 4499 1811.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 1796 5165 1257 2748.6 4817.4 1481.1 1464.8 4487 1806.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3055 5175 1262 2763.4 4812.4 1483.9 1462.7 4477 1810.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3063 5140 2940 2811.1 4740.0 1235.8 1237.0 4433 1673.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3065 5205 2945 2836.3 4794.4 1243.6 1233.7 4293 1686.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3058 5181 2940 2785.4 4700.2 1243.9 1234.5 4415 1682.

(1. tip memory numbers are phase-of-moon anomaly.. irrelevant here)
(2. pipe numbers are only possible with pipe buffer increase patch in
tip.  Often, pipes are truly synchronous, so waking cross CPU is small
loss.  In tip, it's a win because of optimistic mutex spin.. context
switch cost is converted to throughput.  That throughput gain also
cannot be had if you don't do the cross cpu wakeup to get the ball
rolling.  The code in question is acting as enabler for spintex.)

So yeah, the code in question _will_ cause more cross CPU wakeups, and
it _may_ cost power.  It may _save_ power by getting the job done more
efficiently.  Dunno.

Regression?  Depends on what you're measuring.

	-Mike

Re: [Bug #15044] Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2

[Mike Galbraith]

On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 00:38 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
> Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
> Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman-ohbefDXYbNo@public.gmane.org>
> Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
> First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b

I don't know that this should be carried as a regression.

Yes, the code in question increases cross cpu wakeups, but that's the
entire point.  If there is any overlap in execution larger than the cost
of running a scheduler on another core, that time can be converted to
throughput.

Tip AF_UNIX lmbench numbers show that throughput gain being realized,
TCP numbers below that (x) show what can be had for apps which do a lot
of what that microbenchmark does, given a tiny enabler patchlet.

*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
                             UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2853 2923 1132 2829.3 4761.9 1235.0 1234.4 4472 1683.
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2839 2921 1141 2846.5 4779.8 1242.5 1235.9 4455 1684.
marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2838 2935 751. 2838.5 4820.0 1243.6 1235.0 4472 1684.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3057 5166 859. 2760.2 4827.8 1481.1 1466.1 4499 1811.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 1796 5165 1257 2748.6 4817.4 1481.1 1464.8 4487 1806.
marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3055 5175 1262 2763.4 4812.4 1483.9 1462.7 4477 1810.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3063 5140 2940 2811.1 4740.0 1235.8 1237.0 4433 1673.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3065 5205 2945 2836.3 4794.4 1243.6 1233.7 4293 1686.
marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3058 5181 2940 2785.4 4700.2 1243.9 1234.5 4415 1682.

(1. tip memory numbers are phase-of-moon anomaly.. irrelevant here)
(2. pipe numbers are only possible with pipe buffer increase patch in
tip.  Often, pipes are truly synchronous, so waking cross CPU is small
loss.  In tip, it's a win because of optimistic mutex spin.. context
switch cost is converted to throughput.  That throughput gain also
cannot be had if you don't do the cross cpu wakeup to get the ball
rolling.  The code in question is acting as enabler for spintex.)

So yeah, the code in question _will_ cause more cross CPU wakeups, and
it _may_ cost power.  It may _save_ power by getting the job done more
efficiently.  Dunno.

Regression?  Depends on what you're measuring.

	-Mike

Re: [Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Bart Van Assche]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
>
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
> Subject         : Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
> Submitter       : Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>
> Date            : 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)

Hello Rafael,

I thought your plan was to move this item to the 2.6.28 regression
list ? See also
http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/msg/474762980e717a13?pli=1.

Bart.

Re: [Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Bart Van Assche]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
> Subject         : Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
> Submitter       : Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> Date            : 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)

Hello Rafael,

I thought your plan was to move this item to the 2.6.28 regression
list ? See also
http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/msg/474762980e717a13?pli=1.

Bart.

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafał Miłecki]

2010/2/15 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
> Subject         : RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
> Submitter       : Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
> Date            : 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)

Can you reassign this according to last comments, please?

-- 
Rafał

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafał Miłecki]

2010/2/15 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
> Subject         : RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
> Submitter       : Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
> Date            : 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)

Can you reassign this according to last comments, please?

-- 
Rafał
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

Re: [Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> writes:

> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
> Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
> Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
> Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)

I have a set of patches to clear up the sysfs lockdep false positives.  
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/11/329

It requires sprinking a bunch of sysfs_attr_init on the few dynamically
allocated sysfs attributes, and I haven't found them all yet.  Otherwise
it seems to be working well.

Greg should pick up those patches shortly and they should be appearing
in linux-next and then ultimately in 2.6.34.

Eric

Re: [Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Eric W. Biederman]

"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> writes:

> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
> Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
> Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
> Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)

I have a set of patches to clear up the sysfs lockdep false positives.  
http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/11/329

It requires sprinking a bunch of sysfs_attr_init on the few dynamically
allocated sysfs attributes, and I haven't found them all yet.  Otherwise
it seems to be working well.

Greg should pick up those patches shortly and they should be appearing
in linux-next and then ultimately in 2.6.34.

Eric

Re: [Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl> writes:
> 
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
> > Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
> > Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian@free.fr>
> > Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)
> 
> I have a set of patches to clear up the sysfs lockdep false positives.  
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/11/329
> 
> It requires sprinking a bunch of sysfs_attr_init on the few dynamically
> allocated sysfs attributes, and I haven't found them all yet.  Otherwise
> it seems to be working well.
> 
> Greg should pick up those patches shortly and they should be appearing
> in linux-next and then ultimately in 2.6.34.

Great, I'm glad that these issues are being worked on.

Thanks for the information.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14999] possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> writes:
> 
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14999
> > Subject		: possible circular locking dependency detected in rfkill at suspend
> > Submitter	: Christian Casteyde <casteyde.christian-GANU6spQydw@public.gmane.org>
> > Date		: 2010-01-06 21:52 (40 days old)
> 
> I have a set of patches to clear up the sysfs lockdep false positives.  
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/11/329
> 
> It requires sprinking a bunch of sysfs_attr_init on the few dynamically
> allocated sysfs attributes, and I haven't found them all yet.  Otherwise
> it seems to be working well.
> 
> Greg should pick up those patches shortly and they should be appearing
> in linux-next and then ultimately in 2.6.34.

Great, I'm glad that these issues are being worked on.

Thanks for the information.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #15044] Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 00:38 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
> > Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
> > Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman@rm.pp.ru>
> > Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
> > First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b
> 
> I don't know that this should be carried as a regression.
> 
> Yes, the code in question increases cross cpu wakeups, but that's the
> entire point.  If there is any overlap in execution larger than the cost
> of running a scheduler on another core, that time can be converted to
> throughput.
> 
> Tip AF_UNIX lmbench numbers show that throughput gain being realized,
> TCP numbers below that (x) show what can be had for apps which do a lot
> of what that microbenchmark does, given a tiny enabler patchlet.
> 
> *Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
>                              UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
> --------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2853 2923 1132 2829.3 4761.9 1235.0 1234.4 4472 1683.
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2839 2921 1141 2846.5 4779.8 1242.5 1235.9 4455 1684.
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2838 2935 751. 2838.5 4820.0 1243.6 1235.0 4472 1684.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3057 5166 859. 2760.2 4827.8 1481.1 1466.1 4499 1811.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 1796 5165 1257 2748.6 4817.4 1481.1 1464.8 4487 1806.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3055 5175 1262 2763.4 4812.4 1483.9 1462.7 4477 1810.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3063 5140 2940 2811.1 4740.0 1235.8 1237.0 4433 1673.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3065 5205 2945 2836.3 4794.4 1243.6 1233.7 4293 1686.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3058 5181 2940 2785.4 4700.2 1243.9 1234.5 4415 1682.
> 
> (1. tip memory numbers are phase-of-moon anomaly.. irrelevant here)
> (2. pipe numbers are only possible with pipe buffer increase patch in
> tip.  Often, pipes are truly synchronous, so waking cross CPU is small
> loss.  In tip, it's a win because of optimistic mutex spin.. context
> switch cost is converted to throughput.  That throughput gain also
> cannot be had if you don't do the cross cpu wakeup to get the ball
> rolling.  The code in question is acting as enabler for spintex.)
> 
> So yeah, the code in question _will_ cause more cross CPU wakeups, and
> it _may_ cost power.  It may _save_ power by getting the job done more
> efficiently.  Dunno.
> 
> Regression?  Depends on what you're measuring.

OK, so I'm going to close this report as "documented", since this is
intentional behavior.

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: [Bug #15044] Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-02-15 at 00:38 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15044
> > Subject		: Much higher wakeups for "<kernel IPI> : Rescheduling interrupts" since 2.6.32.2
> > Submitter	: Roman Mamedov <roman-ohbefDXYbNo@public.gmane.org>
> > Date		: 2010-01-11 02:58 (35 days old)
> > First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/a1f84a3ab8e002159498814eaa7e48c33752b04b
> 
> I don't know that this should be carried as a regression.
> 
> Yes, the code in question increases cross cpu wakeups, but that's the
> entire point.  If there is any overlap in execution larger than the cost
> of running a scheduler on another core, that time can be converted to
> throughput.
> 
> Tip AF_UNIX lmbench numbers show that throughput gain being realized,
> TCP numbers below that (x) show what can be had for apps which do a lot
> of what that microbenchmark does, given a tiny enabler patchlet.
> 
> *Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Host                OS  Pipe AF    TCP  File   Mmap  Bcopy  Bcopy  Mem   Mem
>                              UNIX      reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
> --------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2853 2923 1132 2829.3 4761.9 1235.0 1234.4 4472 1683.
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2839 2921 1141 2846.5 4779.8 1242.5 1235.9 4455 1684.
> marge      2.6.31.9-smp 2838 2935 751. 2838.5 4820.0 1243.6 1235.0 4472 1684.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3057 5166 859. 2760.2 4827.8 1481.1 1466.1 4499 1811.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 1796 5165 1257 2748.6 4817.4 1481.1 1464.8 4487 1806.
> marge    2.6.33-tip-smp 3055 5175 1262 2763.4 4812.4 1483.9 1462.7 4477 1810.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3063 5140 2940 2811.1 4740.0 1235.8 1237.0 4433 1673.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3065 5205 2945 2836.3 4794.4 1243.6 1233.7 4293 1686.
> marge   2.6.33-tip-smpx 3058 5181 2940 2785.4 4700.2 1243.9 1234.5 4415 1682.
> 
> (1. tip memory numbers are phase-of-moon anomaly.. irrelevant here)
> (2. pipe numbers are only possible with pipe buffer increase patch in
> tip.  Often, pipes are truly synchronous, so waking cross CPU is small
> loss.  In tip, it's a win because of optimistic mutex spin.. context
> switch cost is converted to throughput.  That throughput gain also
> cannot be had if you don't do the cross cpu wakeup to get the ball
> rolling.  The code in question is acting as enabler for spintex.)
> 
> So yeah, the code in question _will_ cause more cross CPU wakeups, and
> it _may_ cost power.  It may _save_ power by getting the job done more
> efficiently.  Dunno.
> 
> Regression?  Depends on what you're measuring.

OK, so I'm going to close this report as "documented", since this is
intentional behavior.

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: [Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> >
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
> > Subject         : Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
> > Submitter       : Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@gmail.com>
> > Date            : 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)
> 
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> I thought your plan was to move this item to the 2.6.28 regression
> list ? See also
> http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/msg/474762980e717a13?pli=1.

Thanks for reminding me about that, done now.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #15177] Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15177
> > Subject         : Asynchronous writes up to 30% slower than in previous kernel versions
> > Submitter       : Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> > Date            : 2010-01-30 16:38 (16 days old)
> 
> Hello Rafael,
> 
> I thought your plan was to move this item to the 2.6.28 regression
> list ? See also
> http://groups.google.com/group/linux.kernel/msg/474762980e717a13?pli=1.

Thanks for reminding me about that, done now.

Rafael

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> 2010/2/15 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
> > Subject         : RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
> > Submitter       : Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
> > Date            : 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)
> 
> Can you reassign this according to last comments, please?

Reassigned to PCI.

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> 2010/2/15 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org>:
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
> > Subject         : RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
> > Submitter       : Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator-Mmb7MZpHnFY@public.gmane.org>
> > Date            : 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)
> 
> Can you reassign this according to last comments, please?

Reassigned to PCI.

Thanks,
Rafael

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 15 February 2010, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> 2010/2/15 Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl>:
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15287
> > Subject         : RadeonKMS segfaults kdm on mobility radeon x700 pcie
> > Submitter       : Jan Kreuzer <kontrollator@gmx.de>
> > Date            : 2010-02-12 17:58 (3 days old)
> 
> Can you reassign this according to last comments, please?

Reassigned to PCI.

Thanks,
Rafael
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

Re: 2.6.33-rc8: Reported regressions from 2.6.32

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> This message contains a list of some regressions from 2.6.32,
> for which there are no fixes in the mainline known to the tracking team.
> If any of them have been fixed already, please let us know.
>
> If you know of any other unresolved regressions from 2.6.32, please let us
> know either and we'll add them to the list.  Also, please let us know
> if any of the entries below are invalid.
>
> Each entry from the list will be sent additionally in an automatic reply
> to this message with CCs to the people involved in reporting and handling
> the issue.

Yay us, 0 for wireless. Stable whoring seems to help.

  Luis

Re: [Bug #15273] Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:35AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
> Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
> Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani@redhat.com>
> Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)


We are taking care of it. It's actually two regressions.
One has a fix that seems to work, and I'm working on the other one,
trying to get that upstream before 2.6.33 gets released.

Please keep the ticket open for now.

Thanks.

Re: [Bug #15273] Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:35AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> know (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
> Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
> Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)


We are taking care of it. It's actually two regressions.
One has a fix that seems to work, and I'm working on the other one,
trying to get that upstream before 2.6.33 gets released.

Please keep the ticket open for now.

Thanks.

Re: [Bug #15273] Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wednesday 17 February 2010, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:35AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
> > Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
> > Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani@redhat.com>
> > Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)
> 
> 
> We are taking care of it. It's actually two regressions.
> One has a fix that seems to work, and I'm working on the other one,
> trying to get that upstream before 2.6.33 gets released.
> 
> Please keep the ticket open for now.

OK, thanks for the update.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #15273] Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wednesday 17 February 2010, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:35AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
> > know (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15273
> > Subject		: Regression in ptrace (Wine) starting with 2.6.33-rc1
> > Submitter	: Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > Date		: 2010-02-11 16:21 (4 days old)
> 
> 
> We are taking care of it. It's actually two regressions.
> One has a fix that seems to work, and I'm working on the other one,
> trying to get that upstream before 2.6.33 gets released.
> 
> Please keep the ticket open for now.

OK, thanks for the update.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #15308] 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit

[Américo Wang]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:37AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
>of recent regressions.
>
>The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
>know (either way).
>
>
>Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
>Subject		: 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit
>Submitter	: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
>Date		: 2010-02-14 16:40 (1 days old)
>First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921
>Message-ID	: <20100214164023.GA2726@jm.kir.nu>
>References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616751807902&w=4
>Handled-By	: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>
>

It should be fixed by this patch:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/15/61

Re: [Bug #15308] 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit

[Américo Wang]

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 12:38:37AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
>of recent regressions.
>
>The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
>from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
>know (either way).
>
>
>Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15308
>Subject		: 2.6.33-rc8 breaks UML with Restrict initial stack space expansion to rlimit
>Submitter	: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
>Date		: 2010-02-14 16:40 (1 days old)
>First-Bad-Commit: http://git.kernel.org/git/linus/803bf5ec259941936262d10ecc84511b76a20921
>Message-ID	: <20100214164023.GA2726-mgr6C1c9aYeHXe+LvDLADg@public.gmane.org>
>References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126616751807902&w=4
>Handled-By	: Michael Neuling <mikey-/owAOxkjmzZAfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>
>

It should be fixed by this patch:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/15/61

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (58 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a summary report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let the tracking team
know (either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (44 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:58:57PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series??, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?
> 
> [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/series

I'll mark it for stable, I'd prefer to wait for .33 to come out before
sending it in.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:58:57PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series??, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?
> 
> [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/series

I'll mark it for stable, I'd prefer to wait for .33 to come out before
sending it in.

thanks,

greg k-h

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
--

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:58:57PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series??, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?
> 
> [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/series

I'll mark it for stable, I'd prefer to wait for .33 to come out before
sending it in.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday 02 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series¹, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?

I guess so.  Thanks!

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday 02 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OWGXanvQGlWp@public.gmane.orgm>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series¹, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?

I guess so.  Thanks!

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Tuesday 02 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> (Adding Greg to Cc:)
> 
> On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > > of recent regressions.
> > > >
> > > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > > (either way).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> > > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OWGXanvQGlWp@public.gmane.orgm>
> > > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > > 
> > > Yes, this is fixed.
> > 
> > Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> > patch fixed it for me"?
> 
> Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named
> 
> sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch
> 
> and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series¹, the patch
> is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
> I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?

I guess so.  Thanks!

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

(Adding Greg to Cc:)

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > of recent regressions.
> > >
> > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > (either way).
> > >
> > >
> > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > 
> > Yes, this is fixed.
> 
> Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> patch fixed it for me"?

Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named

sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch

and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series¹, the patch
is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?

[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/series

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

(Adding Greg to Cc:)

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 09:46:45PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > > of recent regressions.
> > >
> > > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > > (either way).
> > >
> > >
> > > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> > 
> > Yes, this is fixed.
> 
> Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
> patch fixed it for me"?

Rather the second one, i.e. it fixes it for me. The patch is named

sysfs-cache-the-last-sysfs_dirent-to-improve-readdir-scalability-v2.patch

and is "stuck" in Greg's tree. Judging by the quilt series¹, the patch
is slated for submission after 2.6.33. This late in the game for .32,
I'm guessing maybe a stable backport after .33 is out?

[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/gregkh/gregkh-2.6/patches/series

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> 
> Yes, this is fixed.

Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
patch fixed it for me"?

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 01 February 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> >
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> >
> >
> > Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> > Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> > References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> > Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
> > Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/
> 
> Yes, this is fixed.

Do you mean "fixed" as "the fix is in the Linus' tree" or "fixed" as "the
patch fixed it for me"?

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@sisk.pl> wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

Yes, this is fixed.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OWGXanvQGlWp@public.gmane.orgm>
> Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

Yes, this is fixed.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 1:22 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw-KKrjLPT3xs0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
>
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
>
>
> Bug-Entry       : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject         : drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter       : Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> Date            : 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
> References      : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> Handled-By      : Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OWGXanvQGlWp@public.gmane.orgm>
> Patch           : http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

Yes, this is fixed.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (37 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:04:33PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).

Yep, this one is fixed by the patch below. Thanks.

> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (30 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
> Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 11:04:33PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).

Yep, this one is fixed by the patch below. Thanks.

> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (30 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm-BGArkANP9klv6pq1l3V1OdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
> Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (30 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (30 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
Handled-By	: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@aristanetworks.com>
Patch		: http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/70461/



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Throughout its 18-year history, RSA Conference consistently attracts the
world's best and brightest in the field, creating opportunities for Conference
attendees to learn about information security's most important issues through
interactions with peers, luminaries and emerging and established companies.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsaconf-dev2dev
--

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 11 January 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 11:32:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> > Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (16 days old)
> > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> 
> Fix for that is at LKML-Reference: <m1y6kh30pi.fsf_-_@fess.ebiederm.org>

Again, I don't know how to resolve that, sorry.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday 11 January 2010, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 11:32:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> > of recent regressions.
> > 
> > The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> > from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> > (either way).
> > 
> > 
> > Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> > Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> > Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> > Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (16 days old)
> > References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4
> 
> Fix for that is at LKML-Reference: <m1y6kh30pi.fsf_-_-+imSwln9KH6u2/kzUuoCbdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>

Again, I don't know how to resolve that, sorry.

Rafael

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 11:32:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
> Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (16 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4

Fix for that is at LKML-Reference: <m1y6kh30pi.fsf_-_@fess.ebiederm.org>

AFAIR, GregK-H will pick that one up.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Re: [Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Borislav Petkov]

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 11:32:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
> of recent regressions.
> 
> The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
> from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
> (either way).
> 
> 
> Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
> Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
> Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
> Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (16 days old)
> References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4

Fix for that is at LKML-Reference: <m1y6kh30pi.fsf_-_-+imSwln9KH6u2/kzUuoCbdi2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>

AFAIR, GregK-H will pick that one up.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (16 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb@googlemail.com>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (4 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4

[Bug #14949] drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

This message has been generated automatically as a part of a report
of recent regressions.

The following bug entry is on the current list of known regressions
from 2.6.32.  Please verify if it still should be listed and let me know
(either way).


Bug-Entry	: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14949
Subject		: drm_vm.c:drm_mmap: possible circular locking dependency detected
Submitter	: Borislav Petkov <petkovbb-gM/Ye1E23mwN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
Date		: 2009-12-26 9:45 (4 days old)
References	: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126182073616279&w=4