RE: MEI-related WARN_ON() triggered during resume-from-sleep on v4.12-rc2+

[Winkler, Tomas]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dominik Brodowski [mailto:linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2017 11:59
> To: Winkler, Tomas <tomas.winkler@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Usyskin, Alexander <alexander.usyskin@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: MEI-related WARN_ON() triggered during resume-from-sleep on
> v4.12-rc2+
> 
> Thomas,
> 
> on Linus' most recent kernel (v4.12-rc2, git head 0a07b238e5f48), I see the
> following message on my Dell XPS13 when resuming from sleep. MEI is,
> AFAIK, not being used on this system:
>

Thanks for the report,  we haven't change the logic of this code since 4.12 so we need to look for 
changes  in pci and/or pm subsystems.  We try to bisect it. 

Thanks


 
> [  192.940537] Restarting tasks ...
> [  192.940610] PGI is not set
> [  192.940619] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [  192.940623] WARNING: CPU: 0
> PID: 1661 at /home/brodo/local/kernel/git/linux/drivers/misc/mei/hw-
> me.c:653 mei_me_pg_exit_sync+0x351/0x360 [  192.940624] Modules linked
> in:
> [  192.940627] CPU: 0 PID: 1661 Comm: kworker/0:3 Not tainted 4.13.0-rc2+
> #2 [  192.940628] Hardware name: Dell Inc. XPS 13 9343/0TM99H, BIOS A11
> 12/08/2016 [  192.940630] Workqueue: pm pm_runtime_work <snip> [
> 192.940642] Call Trace:
> [  192.940646]  ? pci_pme_active+0x1de/0x1f0 [  192.940649]  ?
> pci_restore_standard_config+0x50/0x50
> [  192.940651]  ? kfree+0x172/0x190
> [  192.940653]  ? kfree+0x172/0x190
> [  192.940655]  ? pci_restore_standard_config+0x50/0x50
> [  192.940663]  mei_me_pm_runtime_resume+0x3f/0xc0
> [  192.940665]  pci_pm_runtime_resume+0x7a/0xa0 [  192.940667]
> __rpm_callback+0xb9/0x1e0 [  192.940668]  ?
> preempt_count_add+0x6d/0xc0 [  192.940670]  rpm_callback+0x24/0x90 [
> 192.940672]  ? pci_restore_standard_config+0x50/0x50
> [  192.940674]  rpm_resume+0x4e8/0x800
> [  192.940676]  pm_runtime_work+0x55/0xb0 [  192.940678]
> process_one_work+0x184/0x3e0 [  192.940680]  worker_thread+0x4d/0x3a0 [
> 192.940681]  ? preempt_count_sub+0x9b/0x100 [  192.940683]
> kthread+0x122/0x140 [  192.940684]  ? process_one_work+0x3e0/0x3e0 [
> 192.940685]  ? __kthread_create_on_node+0x1a0/0x1a0
> [  192.940688]  ret_from_fork+0x27/0x40
> [  192.940690] Code: 96 3a 9e ff 48 8b 7d 98 e8 cd 21 58 00 83 bb bc 01 00 00
> 04 0f 85 40 fe ff ff e9 41 fe ff ff 48 c7 c7 5f 04 99 96 e8 93 6b 9f ff <0f> ff e9 5d
> fd ff ff e8 33 fe 99 ff 0f 1f 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 [  192.940719] ---[ end trace
> a86955597774ead8 ]--- [  192.942540] done.
> 
> This doesn't / didn't happen on v4.12.
> 
> Best,
> 	Dominik