linux-kernel - Re: I/O hangs after resuming from suspend-to-ram

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:   Thu, 21 Sep 2017 06:20:12 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     Martin Steigerwald <martin@...htvoll.de>
Cc:     Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: I/O hangs after resuming from suspend-to-ram

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 03:10:35PM +0200, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Ming Lei - 28.08.17, 20:58:
> > On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 09:43:52AM +0200, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote:
> > > Hi.
> > > 
> > > Here is disk setup for QEMU VM:
> > > 
> > > ===
> > > [root@...hmq ~]# smartctl -i /dev/sda
> > > …
> > > Device Model:     QEMU HARDDISK
> > > Serial Number:    QM00001
> > > Firmware Version: 2.5+
> > > User Capacity:    4,294,967,296 bytes [4.29 GB]
> > > Sector Size:      512 bytes logical/physical
> > > Device is:        Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall]
> > > ATA Version is:   ATA/ATAPI-7, ATA/ATAPI-5 published, ANSI NCITS 340-2000
> > > Local Time is:    Sun Aug 27 09:31:54 2017 CEST
> > > SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability.
> > > SMART support is: Enabled
> > > 
> > > [root@...hmq ~]# lsblk
> > > NAME                MAJ:MIN RM  SIZE RO TYPE   MOUNTPOINT
> > > sda                   8:0    0    4G  0 disk
> > > `-sda1                8:1    0    4G  0 part
> > > 
> > >   `-md0               9:0    0    4G  0 raid10
> > >   
> > >     `-system        253:0    0    4G  0 crypt
> > >     
> > >       |-system-boot 253:1    0  512M  0 lvm    /boot
> > >       |-system-swap 253:2    0  512M  0 lvm    [SWAP]
> > >       
> > >       `-system-root 253:3    0    3G  0 lvm    /
> > > 
> > > sdb                   8:16   0    4G  0 disk
> > > `-sdb1                8:17   0    4G  0 part
> > > 
> > >   `-md0               9:0    0    4G  0 raid10
> > >   
> > >     `-system        253:0    0    4G  0 crypt
> > >     
> > >       |-system-boot 253:1    0  512M  0 lvm    /boot
> > >       |-system-swap 253:2    0  512M  0 lvm    [SWAP]
> > >       
> > >       `-system-root 253:3    0    3G  0 lvm    /
> > > 
> > > sr0                  11:0    1 1024M  0 rom
> > > 
> > > [root@...hmq ~]# mdadm --misc --detail /dev/md0
> > > 
> > > /dev/md0:
> > >         Version : 1.2
> > >   
> > >   Creation Time : Sat Jul 29 16:37:05 2017
> > >   
> > >      Raid Level : raid10
> > >      Array Size : 4191232 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
> > >   
> > >   Used Dev Size : 4191232 (4.00 GiB 4.29 GB)
> > >   
> > >    Raid Devices : 2
> > >   
> > >   Total Devices : 2
> > >   
> > >     Persistence : Superblock is persistent
> > >     
> > >     Update Time : Sun Aug 27 09:30:33 2017
> > >     
> > >           State : clean
> > >  
> > >  Active Devices : 2
> > > 
> > > Working Devices : 2
> > > 
> > >  Failed Devices : 0
> > >  
> > >   Spare Devices : 0
> > >   
> > >          Layout : far=2
> > >      
> > >      Chunk Size : 512K
> > >      
> > >            Name : archiso:0
> > >            UUID : 43f4be59:c8d2fa0a:a94acdff:1c7f2f4e
> > >          
> > >          Events : 485
> > >     
> > >     Number   Major   Minor   RaidDevice State
> > >     
> > >        0       8        1        0      active sync   /dev/sda1
> > >        1       8       17        1      active sync   /dev/sdb1
> > > 
> > > ===
> > > 
> > > In words: 2 virtual disks, RAID10 setup with far-2 layout, LUKS on it,
> > > then
> > > LVM, then ext4 for boot, swap and btrfs for /.
> > > 
> > > I couldn't reproduce the issue with single disk without RAID.
> > 
> > Could you verify if the following patch fixes your issue?

Yes, the patch should address this kind of issue, not related
with RAID specially, and the latest version can be found in the
following link:

	https://marc.info/?l=linux-block&m=150579298505484&w=2

-- 
Ming