Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 12 Jul 2003 15:54:53 +0200 | From | Pavel Machek <> | Subject | Re: [2.5.75] S3 and S4 |
| |
Hi!
> > > > > Suspending devices > > > > > Badness in local_bh_enable at kernel/softirq.c:113 > > > > > Call Trace: > > > > > [<c0130078>] local_bh_enable+0x88/0x90 > > > > > [<f0a44fa4>] e100_do_wol+0x14/0x60 [e100] > > > > > [<f0a461ee>] e100_suspend+0x3e/0xa0 [e100] > > > > > [<f0a461b0>] e100_suspend+0x0/0xa0 [e100] > > > > > [<c0212577>] pci_device_suspend+0x47/0x70 > > > > > [<c029bc99>] device_suspend+0xd9/0x100 > > > > > [<c023e047>] acpi_system_save_state+0x42/0x8c > > > > > [<c023e153>] acpi_suspend+0x5e/0xb3 > > > > > [<c023e394>] acpi_system_write_sleep+0xe3/0x132 > > > > > [<c0177de0>] filp_open+0x60/0x70 > > > > > [<c017952d>] vfs_write+0xad/0x120 > > > > > [<c017963f>] sys_write+0x3f/0x60 > > > > > [<c010b10f>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb > > > > > > > > > > > > > If e100. You have the hardware... > > > > > > No, it's acpi_system_save_state() illegally calling device_suspend() under > > > local_irq_disable(). > > > > Oops, I failed to see this is S3. > > > > I can see that device_suspend( ..., SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN) is called with > > interrupts disabled. But thats okay: (driver.txt) All calls are made > > with interrupts enabled, except for the SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN level. > > OK, it's an e100 bug then. Not allowed to sleep or do spin_unloch_bh() in > device_suspend( ..., SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN). > > That's a fairly awkward restriction.
Actually, its not. Some phase with interrupts off is needed for devices such as interrupt controller. Fix is very simple: move the e100 suspend from SUSPEND_POWER_DOWN to some other level.
Pavel
-- When do you have a heart between your knees? [Johanka's followup: and *two* hearts?] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |