From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755947AbZBSUSP (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:18:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751970AbZBSUR6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:17:58 -0500 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:32789 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751720AbZBSUR6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Feb 2009 15:17:58 -0500 Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:17:24 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt cc: Paul Collins , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [Bug #12667] Badness at kernel/time/timekeeping.c:98 in pmud (timekeeping_suspended) In-Reply-To: <1235032710.8805.37.camel@pasglop> Message-ID: References: <878wognj00.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <200902142342.59186.rjw@sisk.pl> <87hc2u26m5.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <1234775410.26036.122.camel@pasglop> <87d4di1wwr.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <87r61uzv95.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <1235032710.8805.37.camel@pasglop> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LFD 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 21:27 +1300, Paul Collins wrote: > > > Just for laughs I slapped together the following, which seems to do > > the > > > job, although not especially tidily. > > > > And it doesn't even do the job. Judging by this new trace, submitting > > input events from the via-pmu resume function is still too early. > > > What's up Thomas ? We can't call gettimeofday() from a sysdev > suspend/resume ? That's a little bit too harsh no ? Well, harsh or not is not the question here. Fact is that you call gettimeofday() _before_ the timekeeping code has resumed. That's a simple ordering problem. timekeeping is in the sysdev class as well and it's not the only sysdev which has explicit ordering requirements. Thanks, tglx From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [Bug #12667] Badness at kernel/time/timekeeping.c:98 in pmud (timekeeping_suspended) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 21:17:24 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: <878wognj00.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <200902142342.59186.rjw@sisk.pl> <87hc2u26m5.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <1234775410.26036.122.camel@pasglop> <87d4di1wwr.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <87r61uzv95.fsf@burly.wgtn.ondioline.org> <1235032710.8805.37.camel@pasglop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1235032710.8805.37.camel@pasglop> Sender: kernel-testers-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: Paul Collins , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Testers List , Ingo Molnar On Thu, 19 Feb 2009, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 21:27 +1300, Paul Collins wrote: > > > Just for laughs I slapped together the following, which seems to do > > the > > > job, although not especially tidily. > > > > And it doesn't even do the job. Judging by this new trace, submitting > > input events from the via-pmu resume function is still too early. > > > What's up Thomas ? We can't call gettimeofday() from a sysdev > suspend/resume ? That's a little bit too harsh no ? Well, harsh or not is not the question here. Fact is that you call gettimeofday() _before_ the timekeeping code has resumed. That's a simple ordering problem. timekeeping is in the sysdev class as well and it's not the only sysdev which has explicit ordering requirements. Thanks, tglx