lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: e1000e + suspend, 3.9-rc2
Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 04/15/2013 05:29 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> On 03/29/2013 07:04 PM, Allan, Bruce W wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jiri Slaby [mailto:jirislaby@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jiri Slaby
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 5:23 AM
>>>> To: Konstantin Khlebnikov
>>>> Cc: Borislav Petkov; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Rafael J. Wysocki; Bjorn Helgaas;
>>>> x86@kernel.org; lkml; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Allan, Bruce W
>>>> Subject: Re: e1000e + suspend, 3.9-rc2
>>>>
>>>>>>> Ok, I can still see the hardware error message when suspending:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And with 3.8 plus these:
>>>>>> PCI/PM: Clear state_saved during suspend
>>>>>> e1000e: fix pci-device enable-counter balance
>>>>>> e1000e: fix runtime power management transitions
>>>>>> e1000e: fix accessing to suspended device
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I sometimes see this:
>>>>>> pci_pm_suspend():e1000_suspend +0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>>>>>> dpm_run_callback(): pci_pm_suspend+0x0/0x140 returns -2
>>>>>> PM: Device 0000:00:19.0 failed to suspend async: error -2
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any ideas? Am I missing some patch still?
>>>>>
>>>>> Try this:
>>>>> "PCI: Don't try to disable Bus Master on disconnected PCI devices"
>>>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2271641/
>>>>>
>>>>> But I'm not sure, probably it is unrelated because this code works only (?)
>>>>> during shutdown/kexec sequences.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it will help either. -2 here is -E1000_ERR_PHY from
>>>> e1000e_write_phy_reg_mdic if I'm looking correctly. I.e. MDIC not ready
>>>> or unlike MDIC_ERROR.
>>>>
>>>> I think this happened after I put the link down and tried to suspend.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> js
>>>> suse labs
>>>
>>> Sorry for not replying sooner, for some reason some of this thread was filtered
>>> to my junk folder and I didn’t see it until now.
>>>
>>> Jiri, can you provide the output of 'lspci -s 00:19.0 -n -vv' and confirm the scenario
>>> in which the problem occurs? Is this easily reproduced?
>>
>> Sorry about the late reply, I totally forgot about this. lspci output is
>> attached below. The scenario is not rigid as I'm not sure when exactly
>> this happens. It looks like I have to use power saving on that device.
>> And I don't need to use that device at all. Here is an excerpt from one
>> kernel boot modulo e1000e where the error occurred.
>>
>> e1000e: Copyright(c) 1999 - 2012 Intel Corporation.
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: Interrupt Throttling Rate (ints/sec) set to dynamic
>> conservative mode
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0 eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GT/s:Width x1) 3c:97:0e:35:3d:dd
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0 eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0 eth0: MAC: 10, PHY: 11, PBA No: 1000FF-0FF
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 46 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 43 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 43 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 43 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 43 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 45 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 45 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 45 for MSI/MSI-X
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: setting latency timer to 64
>> e1000e 0000:00:19.0: irq 45 for MSI/MSI-X
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>> pci_pm_suspend(): e1000_suspend+0x0/0x10 [e1000e] returns -2
>
> This still happens with 3.9.5 ...
>
> I don't use wired net at all. This usually happens after I enable power
> saving.

I guess that '-2' is one of 'return -E1000_ERR_PHY',
but all that debug messages are omitted by default.

Please enable CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG=y and mount debugfs, after that:
# echo module e1000e +p > /sys/kernel/debug/dynamic_debug/control
If it would be too verbose you can enable these messages more selective.

>
>> 00:19.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Intel Corporation 82579LM Gigabit
>> Network Connection [8086:1502] (rev 04)
>> Subsystem: Lenovo Device [17aa:21f3]
>> Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
>> ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+
>> Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast>TAbort-
>> <TAbort-<MAbort->SERR-<PERR- INTx-
>> Latency: 0
>> Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 46
>> Region 0: Memory at f2500000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
>> Region 1: Memory at f253b000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K]
>> Region 2: I/O ports at 5080 [size=32]
>> Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2
>> Flags: PMEClk- DSI+ D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA
>> PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold+)
>> Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=1 PME-
>> Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
>> Address: 00000000fee00398 Data: 0000
>> Capabilities: [e0] PCI Advanced Features
>> AFCap: TP+ FLR+
>> AFCtrl: FLR-
>> AFStatus: TP-
>> Kernel driver in use: e1000e
>>
>>
>> thanks,
>>
>
>

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-12 23:41    [W:0.069 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site