Re: [2.6.29-rc2] Inconsistent lock state on resume inhres_timers_resume

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 18 ÑÐÐÐÑÑ 2009 20:25:11 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > Rafael, can you think of anything in the s2ram code that would have
> >
> > changed the irqs-off status of hres_timers_resume() in this codepath:
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c013711a>] hres_timers_resume+0xa/0x10
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c013aa8e>] timekeeping_resume+0xee/0x150
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c0273384>] __sysdev_resume+0x14/0x50
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c0273407>] sysdev_resume+0x47/0x80
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c02791ab>] device_power_up+0xb/0x20
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c015043f>] suspend_devices_and_enter+0xcf/0x150
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c0150c2f>] ? freeze_processes+0x3f/0x90
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c0150614>] enter_state+0xf4/0x140
> > > > [17854.688347]  [<c01506dd>] state_store+0x7d/0xc0
> >
> > ?
> >
> 
> As far as I can tell, timekeeping_resume is called via class ->resume 
> method; and according to comments in sysdev_resume() and 
> device_power_up(), they are called with interrupts disabled.
> 
> Looking at suspend_enter, irqs *are* disabled at this point.
> 
> So it actually looks like something (may be some driver) unconditionally 
> enabled irqs in resume path.
> 
> I believe the patch should be hold back until this is clarified.

That's a nice theory!

I've queued up the debug check below instead. Probably the resume code 
should include a similar check at a higher level and print out the 
callback that enables irqs?

	Ingo


---------------->