From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E540C433EF for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:34:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BC5C61391 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:34:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 0BC5C61391 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 308796B0071; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 11:34:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 268276B0072; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 11:34:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0BB4A900002; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 11:34:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0025.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.25]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29676B0071 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 11:34:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin27.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AC201F85D for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:34:48 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78717213456.27.6DF5C61 Received: from mail-pg1-f171.google.com (mail-pg1-f171.google.com [209.85.215.171]) by imf03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D65CD3000099 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:34:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg1-f171.google.com with SMTP id f5so22834138pgc.12 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:34:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LtOvVCugM9KLxCYe5AwWOsOF2o7xv+ODVigMZQVQPEs=; b=hkerBJDgbpcqDOVjVEp3Pn+butj1LPsBU9rnMXKlBYWITNT8tHCCbYBQeRXN1hJPgc i5VhmzS5P64QkMqedjjBnWnKlYyj65KOvdNRF1xSPVkVwlRfW2l+2GpM6qTKZ54l7DoX B+nDvkPBXZ50/gOjuvl9nHDwYQHo1F/mVPMvJirIE/m4x6FM5seKrzHH5tpUa4ZVHzAr yCIaNoBP58iRWr7ECGdFxU3x8WbkNqo0mtVVk155ac9bb4QdKyoPLgRTUvnmx0LBb7x+ LPYVmm0mXzW76ZGXzatVVkegUsmHTLNxhHeZNRVEg8h7ZDvHcJgfvGCRQ1dYYPRe8ii/ 576g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LtOvVCugM9KLxCYe5AwWOsOF2o7xv+ODVigMZQVQPEs=; b=0q7DUUiZ1goJKLe0lVgZlJMNIFLNzHNQxHZy06ZfreE2cwKRtqGWGfeaRDzgLtvKWb LW5+Miab5La0O6HuX+eenCy0cNbBK5Ay0mhoazzrKwGGSqtWTu8/bs5AMSNkZk4JHB/m j5PSFSbMQuSGhPbtkwAXkPhiIgmjEqcWHb8yM6pi6QZkcZigXWWM3a8KsGBxKN3OO2z6 m/0bD2eRq95ZF9U5fc3tU1k18Bwx1H2whAh14/EbB0cfmdUIji2Jjh7NzJXgjl64bCeL R1cg53md1V57mAfvktIrDfN7Ay5H6POkn8VJQ7oFVUWETV8ueTTih/9OTp5PDyfU9k3Z yQew== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533NMUuNdFujmLHiwfQHQPdiyHCnlIFpGyrFEyoA1huEwOZGBZ9P k8fKtMwTTNU8RIZffC1thao= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxvde6S00r/XwQfye4zt28OJEbUt04GWcBkVtiEcePThNs+MlLDSHZjb30yaldpgsfmblD3LA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:b45:b0:44d:c4c4:409b with SMTP id p5-20020a056a000b4500b0044dc4c4409bmr585360pfo.3.1634744086903; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.230.29.137] ([192.19.223.252]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x184sm2905618pfc.44.2021.10.20.08.34.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:34:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8ebd1cad-fa35-8ad8-0be5-3dd3364196cb@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 08:34:44 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [PM] bfcc1e67ff: kernel-selftests.breakpoints.step_after_suspend_test.fail Content-Language: en-US To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Linux Memory Management List , lkp@lists.01.org, kbuild test robot , kernel test robot , Linux PM References: <20211014075731.GB18719@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> <51c0a15f-1941-f161-dcec-a7a9acc726f2@gmail.com> <6755cf07-fa5a-cbb7-c076-57c162a08c99@gmail.com> <20aedfba-14e3-3677-d21a-b87610095445@gmail.com> <4300a3d4-76de-70c5-2a7b-c4d066ef5bc6@gmail.com> From: Florian Fainelli In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: imf03.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=hkerBJDg; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (imf03.hostedemail.com: domain of f.fainelli@gmail.com designates 209.85.215.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=f.fainelli@gmail.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: D65CD3000099 X-Stat-Signature: jwcobeocixmm1r3fynuw4z3xjogpetu6 X-HE-Tag: 1634744085-83859 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 10/20/2021 6:49 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 9:04 PM Florian Fainelli wrote: >> >> On 10/19/21 11:53 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> 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 >>>>>>>> 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. >> >> Reverting my commit will break powerpc and other ARM/ARM64 platforms >> where mem is not supported (via PSCI), > > It won't break anything, although the things that didn't work before > will still not work after it. > > And "mem" is always supported even if there are no suspend_ops at all, > in which case it becomes an alternative way to trigger s2idle. > > So, on the affected systems, what's there in /sys/power/? Is > mem_sleep present? If so, what's in it? With 4.9 which is what I used initially: # cat /sys/power/state freeze standby # cat /sys/power/ pm_async pm_print_times pm_wakeup_irq wakeup_count pm_freeze_timeout pm_test state With a newer kernel without my patch: # cat /sys/power/state freeze standby mem # cat /sys/power/mem_sleep s2idle shallow [deep] # cat /sys/power/ mem_sleep pm_freeze_timeout pm_wakeup_irq wakeup_count pm_async pm_print_times state pm_debug_messages pm_test suspend_stats/ > >> I have a change pending for PSCI >> that will actually check that SYSTEM_SUSPEND is supported before >> unconditionally making use of it. >> >>> >>> 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. >> >> So how do we all get our cookie here? Should we just slap an #ifndef >> CONFIG_ACPI in order to allow platforms that do not have "mem" to not >> have it? > > Certainly not. > > I've just hacked my test-bed system with ACPI so it does not register > any suspend_ops at all and I have "freeze mem disk" in > /sys/power/state and "s2idle" in /sys/power/mem_sleep. Writing "mem" > to /sys/power/state causes s2idle to be carried out. > > Since this is the expected behavior, I'm not sure what the problem is. The problem is advertising "mem" in /sys/power/state when the state is not actually supported by the platform firmware here, whether that translates into the form of s2idle or not. It is not supported, and it should not be there IMHO. I was late to the game in identifying that, but the 4.9 kernel makes sense to me. Similarly, if you take arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pmc.c only PM_SUSPEND_STANDBY is valid, so advertising mem would be wrong if we don't look at what ->valid tells us. -- Florian