| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <AANLkTinc3=fd7j0v+6iCpLuvpskW5jbxKCDcScuX_EQy@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 15:37:47 -0700 From: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> To: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, mark gross <markgross@...gnar.org>, e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: mmotm 2010-07-19 - e1000e vs. pm_qos_update_request issues On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 00:12, Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> wrote: > On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 14:07:51 -0700 > Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 16:35:25 -0400 >> Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu wrote: >> >> > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:38:09 PDT, akpm@...ux-foundation.org said: >> > > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-07-19-16-37 has been uploaded to >> > > >> > > http://userweb.kernel.org/~akpm/mmotm/ >> > >> > Throws a warning at boot: >> > >> > [ 1.786060] WARNING: at kernel/pm_qos_params.c:264 pm_qos_update_request+0x28/0x54() >> > [ 1.786088] Hardware name: Latitude E6500 >> > [ 1.787045] pm_qos_update_request() called for unknown object >> > [ 1.787966] Modules linked in: >> > [ 1.788940] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.35-rc5-mmotm0719 #1 >> > [ 1.790035] Call Trace: >> > [ 1.791121] [<ffffffff81037335>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0x98 >> > [ 1.792205] [<ffffffff810373e1>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x41/0x43 >> > [ 1.793279] [<ffffffff81057c14>] pm_qos_update_request+0x28/0x54 >> > [ 1.794347] [<ffffffff8134889e>] e1000_configure+0x421/0x459 >> > [ 1.795393] [<ffffffff8134afbd>] e1000_open+0xbd/0x37c >> > [ 1.796436] [<ffffffff8105743a>] ? raw_notifier_call_chain+0xf/0x11 >> > [ 1.797491] [<ffffffff8145f948>] __dev_open+0xae/0xe2 >> > [ 1.798547] [<ffffffff8145f997>] dev_open+0x1b/0x49 >> > [ 1.799612] [<ffffffff8146e36e>] netpoll_setup+0x84/0x259 >> > [ 1.800685] [<ffffffff81b5037c>] init_netconsole+0xbc/0x21f >> > [ 1.801744] [<ffffffff81b5026c>] ? sir_wq_init+0x0/0x35 >> > [ 1.802793] [<ffffffff81b502c0>] ? init_netconsole+0x0/0x21f >> > [ 1.803845] [<ffffffff810002ff>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x12f >> > [ 1.804885] [<ffffffff81b2ccae>] kernel_init+0x138/0x1c2 >> > [ 1.805915] [<ffffffff81003554>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 >> > [ 1.806937] [<ffffffff81590e00>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30 >> > [ 1.807955] [<ffffffff81b2cb76>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1c2 >> > [ 1.808958] [<ffffffff81003550>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10 >> > [ 1.809958] ---[ end trace 84b562a00a60539e ]--- >> > >> > Looks like a repeat of something I reported against -mmotm 2010-05-11, though a >> > WARNING rather than an outright crash - the traceback is pretty much identical. >> > I have *no* idea why -rc3-mmotm0701 doesn't whinge similarly. >> > >> >> I don't recall you reporting that, sorry. >> >> The warning was added by >> >> : commit 82f682514a5df89ffb3890627eebf0897b7a84ec >> : Author: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de> >> : AuthorDate: Mon Jul 5 22:53:06 2010 +0200 >> : Commit: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl> >> : CommitDate: Mon Jul 19 02:00:34 2010 +0200 >> : >> : pm_qos: Get rid of the allocation in pm_qos_add_request() >> >> >> It's a pretty crappy warning too. Neither the warning nor the code >> comments provide developers with any hint as to what they have done >> wrong, nor what they must do to fix things. And the patch changelog >> doesn't mention the new warnings *at all*. >> >> So one must assume that the people who stuck this thing in the tree >> have volunteered to fix e1000e. Let's cc 'em. >> > > e1000 calls update_request before registering said request with pm_qos. > This was silently ignored before but now emits a warning. The warning > is sound, because it means, that the constraint-request didn't take > effect. > > The right thing is probably to register the request before > calling update_request. > > Attached patch moves the registering from e1000_up to e1000_open and > the unregistering from e1000_down to e1000_close. > It is only compile-tested as I don't have the hardware. > > Cheers, > Flo > > p.s.: sorry if this get's mangled or is wrongly formatted, i'm just using > the "insert file" option of my mailclient and crossing my fingers... > > > From 693c71b911ff0845c872261d5704a1d40960722d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> > Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:44:21 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] e1000e: register pm_qos request on hardware activation > > The pm_qos_add_request call has to register the pm_qos request with the pm_qos > susbsystem before first use of the pm_qos request via > pm_qos_update_request. > > As pm_qos changed to use plists there is no benefit in registering and > unregistering the pm_qos request on ifup/ifdown and thus we move the > registering into e1000_open and the unregistering in e1000_close. > > This fixes the following warning: > > [ 1.786060] WARNING: at kernel/pm_qos_params.c:264 > pm_qos_update_request+0x28/0x54() > [ 1.786088] Hardware name: Latitude E6500 > [ 1.787045] pm_qos_update_request() called for unknown object > [ 1.787966] Modules linked in: > [ 1.788940] Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.35-rc5-mmotm0719 #1 > [ 1.790035] Call Trace: > [ 1.791121] [<ffffffff81037335>] warn_slowpath_common+0x80/0x98 > [ 1.792205] [<ffffffff810373e1>] warn_slowpath_fmt+0x41/0x43 > [ 1.793279] [<ffffffff81057c14>] pm_qos_update_request+0x28/0x54 > [ 1.794347] [<ffffffff8134889e>] e1000_configure+0x421/0x459 > [ 1.795393] [<ffffffff8134afbd>] e1000_open+0xbd/0x37c > [ 1.796436] [<ffffffff8105743a>] ? raw_notifier_call_chain+0xf/0x11 > [ 1.797491] [<ffffffff8145f948>] __dev_open+0xae/0xe2 > [ 1.798547] [<ffffffff8145f997>] dev_open+0x1b/0x49 > [ 1.799612] [<ffffffff8146e36e>] netpoll_setup+0x84/0x259 > [ 1.800685] [<ffffffff81b5037c>] init_netconsole+0xbc/0x21f > [ 1.801744] [<ffffffff81b5026c>] ? sir_wq_init+0x0/0x35 > [ 1.802793] [<ffffffff81b502c0>] ? init_netconsole+0x0/0x21f > [ 1.803845] [<ffffffff810002ff>] do_one_initcall+0x7a/0x12f > [ 1.804885] [<ffffffff81b2ccae>] kernel_init+0x138/0x1c2 > [ 1.805915] [<ffffffff81003554>] kernel_thread_helper+0x4/0x10 > [ 1.806937] [<ffffffff81590e00>] ? restore_args+0x0/0x30 > [ 1.807955] [<ffffffff81b2cb76>] ? kernel_init+0x0/0x1c2 > [ 1.808958] [<ffffffff81003550>] ? kernel_thread_helper+0x0/0x10 > [ 1.809958] ---[ end trace 84b562a00a60539e ]--- > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org> > --- > drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > Thanks I have added the patch to my queue. -- Cheers, Jeff -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists