linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix S4 regression

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 23 Oct 2011 17:29:24 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@...cle.com>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Rafael J.Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Fix S4 regression

On 10/23/2011 02:19 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> The commit 4b239f458: [x86-64, mm: Put early page table high] causes
> a S4 regression since 2.6.39, namely the machine reboots occasionally
> at S4 resume.  It doesn't happen always, overall rate is about 1/20.
> But, like other bugs, once when this happens, it continues to happen.
> 
> This patch fixes the problem by essentially reverting the memory
> assignment in the older way.
> 
> Cc: <stable@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> 
> ---
> I resend this as a "fix" patch now before it's forgotten and rotten.
> It's just papering again over the mystery, but IMO better than the
> hard-reset behavior as of now.  Unfortunately, bisection is pretty 
> much difficult because the bug itself is fairly unstable...



Did you try to check several commit that Rafael pointed out:


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2011, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>>
>> If my previous test -- 2.6.37+Yinghai's patches didn't show the
>> problem -- is correct, it means that some change in 2.6.38 reacted
>> badly with Yinghai's patches, not about 2.6.39.  I'll check tomorrow
>> again whether this observation is really correct.
>
> Yes, that would be good to know, thanks for doing this!
>
> If that turns out to be the case, there are the following commits
> looking like worth checking:
>
> d344e38 x86, nx: Mark the ACPI resume trampoline code as +x
> 884b821 ACPI: Fix acpi_os_read_memory() and acpi_os_write_memory() (v2)
> d551d81 ACPI / PM: Call suspend_nvs_free() earlier during resume
> 2d6d9fd ACPI: Introduce acpi_os_ioremap()

Thanks

Yinghai Lu
--
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/