Re: [PM] bfcc1e67ff: kernel-selftests.breakpoints.step_after_suspend_test.fail

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On 10/15/2021 9:40 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> On 10/15/21 11:45 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On 10/14/2021 11:55 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > On 10/14/21 12:23 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On 10/14/2021 6:26 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > > > On 10/14/21 12:57 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > > > Greeting,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-9):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > commit: bfcc1e67ff1e4aa8bfe2ca57f99390fc284c799d ("PM: sleep: Do not
> > > > > > assume that "mem" is always present")
> > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
> > > > > > master
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > in testcase: kernel-selftests
> > > > > > version: kernel-selftests-x86_64-c8c9111a-1_20210929
> > > > > > with following parameters:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >       group: group-00
> > > > > >       ucode: 0x11
> > > > > >
> > > > > > test-description: The kernel contains a set of "self tests" under the
> > > > > > tools/testing/selftests/ directory. These are intended to be small
> > > > > > unit tests to exercise individual code paths in the kernel.
> > > > > > test-url: https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/kselftest.txt
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > on test machine: 288 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon Phi(TM) CPU 7295
> > > > > > @ 1.50GHz with 80G memory
> > > > > >
> > > > > > caused below changes (please refer to attached dmesg/kmsg for entire
> > > > > > log/backtrace):
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> > > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Thanks for your report. Assuming that the code responsible for
> > > > > registering the suspend operations is drivers/acpi/sleep.c for your
> > > > > platform, and that acpi_sleep_suspend_setup() iterated over all
> > > > > possible
> > > > > sleep states, your platform must somehow be returning that
> > > > > ACPI_STATE_S3
> > > > > is not a supported state somehow?
> > > > >
> > > > > Rafael have you ever encountered something like that?
> > > > Yes, there are systems with ACPI that don't support S3.
> > > OK and do you know what happens when we enter suspend with "mem" in
> > > those cases? Do we immediately return because ultimately the firmware
> > > does not support ACPI S3?
> > "mem" should not be present in the list of available strings then, so it
> > should be rejected right away.
> Well yes, that was the purpose of the patch I submitted, but assuming
> that we did provide "mem" as one of the possible standby modes even
> though that was wrong (before patch), and the test was trying to enter
> ACPI S3 standby, what would have happened, would the ACPI firmware honor
> the request but return an error, or would it actually enter ACPI S3?
>
> In any case, I will change the test to check that this is a supported
> standby mode before trying it.

Unfortunately, I will need to revert bfcc1e67ff1e4aa8bfe2, because it 
breaks user space compatibility and that's got caught properly by the test.

What happens is that "mem" is a "pointer" to a secondary list of 
possible states and that generally is "s2idle shallow deep" and if 
s2idle is the only available option, it will be just "s2idle".

This list is there in /sys/power/mem_sleep.

It was done this way, because some variants of user space expect "mem" 
to be always present and don't recognize "freeze" properly.

Sorry for the confusion.