linux-kernel - Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 06 Mar 2007 17:26:41 +0100
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org,
	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>,
	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>,
	Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>
Subject: Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 11:11 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> the spin-up takes a few seconds here under suspend/resume simulation:
> 
>  | ata1: waiting for device to spin up (7 secs)
>  | Restarting tasks ... done.
> 
>  [5-10 seconds pass]
> 
>  | ata1: SATA link up 1.5 Gbps (SStatus 113 SControl 300)
>  | ata1.00: configured for UDMA/100
>  | SCSI device sda: 156301488 512-byte hdwr sectors (80026 MB)
>  | sda: Write Protect is off
>  | sda: Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00
>  | SCSI device sda: write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA
> 
> with real resume it takes even longer time - but i dont see where the 
> delays come from in that case - i suspect it's SATA.

SATA has another nice feature. Somehow there is an interrupt pending on
the SATA controller, which comes in somewhere in the middle of resume.
If it happens before the SATA code resumed, the SATA code ignores the
interrupt and the interrupt is disabled due to "nobody cared", which in
turn prevents SATA to ever become functional again.

Any idea on that one ?

	tglx


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/