Re: [PATCH] swsusp: properly suspend and resume *all* devices

[Pavel Machek]

On Po 03-01-05 18:08:07, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> > swsusp does not suspend and resume *all* devices, including system
> > devices. This has been the case since at least 2.6.9, if not earlier.
> > 
> > One effect of this is that resuming fails to properly reconfigure
> > interrupt routers. In 2.6.9 this was obscured by other kernel code,
> > but in 2.6.10 this often causes post-resume APIC errors and near-total
> > failure of some PCI devices (e.g. network, sound and USB controllers).
> > 
> > On at least one of my systems, without this patch I also have to "ifdown
> > eth0;ifup eth0" to get networking to function after resuming, even after
> > working around the interrupt routing problem mentioned above. With this
> > patch, networking simply works after a resume, and the ifdown/ifup is
> > no longer needed.
> > 
> > This patch is against 2.6.10-mm1, although it applies with an offset to
> > 2.6.10-bk4 as well. I have tested it against 2.6.10-mm1 and 2.6.10-bk4,
> > with and without "noapic", with and without "acpi=off". However, I have
> > not tested it on a highmem system.
> > 
> > I believe this patch fixes a severe problem in swsusp; I would like to
> > see this patch (or at least *some* kind of fix for this problem) tested
> > more widely and committed to mainline before the 2.6.11 release.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Barry K. Nathan <barryn@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Ack. [I have similar patch in my tree, but yours is better in error
> checking area. Please push it to akpm.]

Actually you missed second half: same code should be added around
swsusp_arch_resume. It is not too critical there, but its right thing
to do.
									Pavel

> > --- linux-2.6.10-mm1/kernel/power/swsusp.c	2005-01-03 02:16:15.175265255 -0800
> > +++ linux-2.6.10-mm1-bkn3/kernel/power/swsusp.c	2005-01-03 06:27:07.753344731 -0800
> > @@ -843,11 +843,22 @@
> >  	if ((error = arch_prepare_suspend()))
> >  		return error;
> >  	local_irq_disable();
> > +	/* At this point, device_suspend() has been called, but *not*
> > +	 * device_power_down(). We *must* device_power_down() now.
> > +	 * Otherwise, drivers for some devices (e.g. interrupt controllers)
> > +	 * become desynchronized with the actual state of the hardware
> > +	 * at resume time, and evil weirdness ensues.
> > +	 */
> > +	if ((error = device_power_down(PM_SUSPEND_DISK))) {
> > +		local_irq_enable();
> > +		return error;
> > +	}
> >  	save_processor_state();
> >  	error = swsusp_arch_suspend();
> >  	/* Restore control flow magically appears here */
> >  	restore_processor_state();
> >  	restore_highmem();
> > +	device_power_up();
> >  	local_irq_enable();
> >  	return error;
> >  }
> 

-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/