Re: Regression from "ACPI: OSI: Remove Linux-Dell-Video _OSI string"? (was: Re: Bug#1036530: linux-signed-amd64: Hard lock up of system)

[Lyude Paul]

On Thu, 2023-06-01 at 11:18 -0500, Limonciello, Mario wrote:
> +Lyude, Lukas, Karol
> 
> On 5/31/2023 6:40 PM, Nick Hastings wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > * Nick Hastings <nicholaschastings@xxxxxxxxx> [230530 16:01]:
> > > * Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx> [230530 13:00]:
> > <snip>
> > > > As you're actually loading nouveau, can you please try nouveau.runpm=0 on
> > > > the kernel command line?
> > > I'm not intentionally loading it. This machine also has intel graphics
> > > which is what I prefer. Checking my
> > > /etc/modprobe.d/blacklist-nvidia-nouveau.conf
> > > I see:
> > > 
> > > blacklist nvidia
> > > blacklist nvidia-drm
> > > blacklist nvidia-modeset
> > > blacklist nvidia-uvm
> > > blacklist ipmi_msghandler
> > > blacklist ipmi_devintf
> > > 
> > > So I thought I had blacklisted it but it seems I did not. Since I do not
> > > want to use it maybe it is better to check if the lock up occurs with
> > > nouveau blacklisted. I will try that now.
> > I blacklisted nouveau and booted into a 6.1 kernel:
> > % uname -a
> > Linux xps 6.1.0-9-amd64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Debian 6.1.27-1 (2023-05-08) x86_64 GNU/Linux
> > 
> > It has been running without problems for nearly two days now:
> > % uptime
> >   08:34:48 up 1 day, 16:22,  2 users,  load average: 1.33, 1.26, 1.27
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Nick.
> 
> Thanks, that makes a lot more sense now.
> 
> Nick, Can you please test if nouveau works with runtime PM in the
> latest 6.4-rc?
> 
> If it works in 6.4-rc, there are probably nouveau commits that need
> to be backported to 6.1 LTS.
> 
> If it's still broken in 6.4-rc, I believe you should file a bug:
> 
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/nouveau/
> 
> 
> Lyude, Lukas, Karol
> 
> This thread is in relation to this commit:
> 
> 24867516f06d ("ACPI: OSI: Remove Linux-Dell-Video _OSI string")
> 
> Nick has found that runtime PM is *not* working for nouveau.
> 
> If you recall we did 24867516f06d because 5775b843a619 was
> supposed to have fixed it.

Gotcha, I guess keep me updated since it seems like things -might- be working
from what I gathered here? Happy to look further if they find that 6.4-rc is
broken though

> 

-- 
Cheers,
 Lyude Paul (she/her)
 Software Engineer at Red Hat