Re: Revert 9745cdb36da83aeec198650b410ca06304cf792 ("select: usefreezable blocking call")?

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 07:39:23 PM Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki
>> <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On 10/29/2013 8:41 PM, Paul Bolle wrote:
>> >>
>> >> 0) Summary: ever since I tried running (release candidates of) v3.11 on
>> >> the two working i686s I still have lying around I ran into issues on
>> >> resuming from suspend. Reverting 9745cdb36da83aeec198650b410ca06304cf792
>> >> ("select: use freezable blocking call") resolves those issues.
>> >>
>> >> 1) Resuming from suspend on i686 on (release candidates of) v3.11 and
>> >> later triggers issues like:
>> >>      traps: systemd[1] general protection ip:b738e490 sp:bf882fc0 error:0
>> >> in libc-2.16.so[b731c000+1b0000]
>> >>
>> >> and
>> >>      traps: rtkit-daemon[552] general protection ip:804d6e5 sp:b6cb32f0
>> >> error:0 in rtkit-daemon[8048000+d000]
>> >>
>> >> Once I hit the systemd error I can only get out of the mess that the
>> >> system is at that point by power cycling it.
>> >>
>> >> 2) I bisected that issue to commit
>> >> 9745cdb36da83aeec198650b410ca06304cf792 ("select: use freezable blocking
>> >> call"). The, rather impressive, bisect log is pasted at the end of this
>> >> message. It took 23 builds to pinpoint this issue in the v3.10..v3.11
>> >> range! Sadly, I have no clue why that commit triggers this issue.
>> >>
>> >> 3) Reverting that commit on top of v3.12-rc7 gets me a system that
>> >> resumes without issues. (That revert needed one trivial context change.
>> >> Note that I haven't actually tried v3.12-rc7 plain. But v3.12-rc6 and
>> >> earlier also had this issue, so I'm sure the revert did the trick for
>> >> v3.12-rc7.)
>> >>
>> >> 4) Should this commit be reverted? Or is there a better fix?
>> >
>> >
>> > In short, yes, it should.
>> >
>> > I've already queued up a revert of something very similar and I'm going to
>> > revert this one too.
>>
>> To be clear, that's queued for 3.12 which is releasing really soon
>> now.  Is that correct?
>
> Yes, it is.  I'm going to send a pull request with that tomorrow if all goes
> well.

Excellent.  Thanks for confirming.

josh
--
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/