linux-kernel - Re: Commit 500f7147cf5bafd139056d521536b10c2bc2e154 breaks _resume

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <AANLkTi=KGMJ9vLaLfkzGQrc-F2eB5CRmDX1L5UohPTZ=@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 7 Feb 2011 16:36:33 +0800
From:	Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:	Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Commit 500f7147cf5bafd139056d521536b10c2bc2e154 breaks _resume_

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:25 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
> At Mon, 7 Feb 2011 13:02:46 +0800,
> Jeff Chua wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jeff Chua <jeff.chua.linux@...il.com> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 11:27 PM, Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> One last step: move contents of intel_crtc_reset() back to
>> >> intel_crtc_init() one by one.
>> >>
>> >> The active flag is my suspicion. I was thinking that we brought up the
>> >> outputs in a similar manner upon resume as upon initial boot. On
>> >> reflection, this is the not case.
>> >>
>> >> However, the first action we take inside modesetting is to disable the
>> >> outputs about to be reconfigured. So setting active should be the right
>> >> course of action so that cleanup any residual state from resume.
>> >>
>> >> So I am intrigued as to which line is the cause, and just where the
>> >> machine becomes unresponsive...
>> >
>> > It's this line causing the problem.
>> >
>> > intel_crtc->active = true; /* force the pipe off on setup_init_config */
>> >
>> >
>> > When it's called before entering intel_crtc_reset(&intel_crtc->base),
>> > it works, but if called within the function, it doesn't work. Strange.
>> > Not sure whether is passing the correct value to to_intel_crtc(crtc)?
>>
>> I've added printk() below and the function returns a different value
>> of intel_crtc.
>>
>>
>> static void intel_crtc_reset(struct drm_crtc *crtc)
>> {
>>         struct intel_crtc *intel_crtc = to_intel_crtc(crtc);
>>         printk("intel_crtc %p\n", intel_crtc); ===> intel_crtc ffff8802349d1000
>>
>> }
>>
>> printk("intel_crtc %p\n", intel_crtc); ===> intel_crtc ffff8802349d0000
>> intel_crtc_reset(&intel_crtc->base);
>
> That's weird.  Since base is the first member, both intel_crtc and crtc
> must be identical.

In case I'm messing something up, here's my intel_display.c

Thanks,
Jeff

View attachment "intel_display.c" of type "text/x-csrc" (202316 bytes)