linux-kernel - Re: Kernel 5.3.x, 5.2.2+: VMware player suspend on 64/32 bit guests

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]

Message-ID: <CAM6Zs0XE8GW-P4Q3YM3KZo-1L+g2wt5QRN+JM3_m1xuwgFDVXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Aug 2019 07:34:35 -0500
From:   Woody Suwalski <terraluna977@...il.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Woody Suwalski <terraluna977@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Kernel 5.3.x, 5.2.2+: VMware player suspend on 64/32 bit guests

On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 2:37 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> Woody,
>
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2019, Woody Suwalski wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 1:24 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > > The ACPI handler is not the culprit. This is either an emulation bug or
> > > something really strange. Can you please use a WARN_ON() if the loop is
> > > exited via the timeout so we can see in which context this happens?
> > >
> >
> > B. On 5.3-rc4 problem is gone. I guess it is overall good sign.
>
> Now the interesting question is what changed between 5.3-rc3 and
> 5.3-rc4. Could you please try to bisect that?
>

Apparently I can not, and frustrated'ingly do not understand it.
Tried twice, and every time I get it broken to the end of bisection -
so the fixed-in-5.3-rc4 theory falls apart. Yet if I build cleanly
5.3-rc4 or -rc5, it works OK.
Then on a 32 bit system - I first tried with a scaled-down kernel
(just with the drivers needed in the VM). That one is never working,
even in rc5. Yet the "full" kernel works OK. So now there is a config
issue variation on top of other problem?

>
> dpm_suspend_noirq() is called with all CPUs online and interrupts
> enabled. In that case an interrupt pending in IRR does not make any sense
> at all. Confused.
>
For now I use a timeout counter patch - and it is showing 100% irq9
jammed and needing rescue. And I am even more confused...

Thanks, Woody