linux-kernel - Re: resume regression in 2.6.37

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:	Mon, 17 Jan 2011 19:41:13 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Sven Neumann <s.neumann@...mfeld.com>
cc:	Daniel Mack <daniel@...aq.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: resume regression in 2.6.37

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Sven Neumann wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 13:40 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2011, Sven Neumann wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 18:33 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Without the revert there is absolutely no sign of resume. With the
> > > > > change reverted I can see that the PXA powers up again, there's an LED
> > > > > showing that the USB controller has power again. Unfortunately there's
> > > > > seems to be another problem and the resume doesn't complete. I've tried
> > > > > to get console output by using no_console_suspend, but there's just
> > > > > gibberish on the console after resume :(
> > > > > 
> > > > > Any idea on how to proceed from here? I could perhaps ask our hardware
> > > > > engineer to try find out where exactly we are stuck in the resume. But
> > > > > I'd like to avoid that if possible.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you stick a printk into the set_wake() function of that irq chip
> > > > and print the irq and on arguments and the return value . Run that
> > > > with both stock 2.6.37 and the patch reverted.
> > > 
> > > pxa3xx_set_wake(31, 1) returns 0
> > > 
> > > Same result with stock 2.6.37 and the patch reverted. Except that
> > > without the patch reverted, the device doesn't power up again.
> > 
> > Ok, can we agree that the patch has no functional impact on the
> > set_wake function? And I don't see a reason why reverting that patch
> > results in a working resume. That does not make sense at all. Which
> > compiler version are you using ?
> 
> I agree that this is all very weird and as far as I understand the patch
> it should have no functional impact. Unfortunately reverting the patch
> does not result in a working resume, but at least it makes a difference
> and at the moment it's the only trace I have.
> 
> My cross-compile tool-chain uses GCC 4.3.5.

Can you try a different compiler ?

Thanks,

	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/