Message-ID: <7f6ec5b3-b5c7-f564-003e-132f112b7cf4@googlemail.com>
Date:   Sat, 18 Feb 2023 18:55:44 +0000
From:   Chris Clayton <chris2553@...glemail.com>
To:     Karol Herbst <kherbst@...hat.com>
Cc:     Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Ben Skeggs <skeggsb@...il.com>, bskeggs@...hat.com,
        Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>,
        ML nouveau <nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ML dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>
Subject: Re: linux-6.2-rc4+ hangs on poweroff/reboot: Bisected



On 18/02/2023 15:19, Chris Clayton wrote:
> 
> 
> On 18/02/2023 12:25, Karol Herbst wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 18, 2023 at 1:22 PM Chris Clayton <chris2553@...glemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15/02/2023 11:09, Karol Herbst wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 11:36 AM Linux regression tracking #update
>>>> (Thorsten Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 13.02.23 10:14, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/02/2023 02:57, Dave Airlie wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 12 Feb 2023 at 00:43, Chris Clayton <chris2553@...glemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 10/02/2023 19:33, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 10.02.23 20:01, Karol Herbst wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 7:35 PM Linux regression tracking (Thorsten
>>>>>>>>>> Leemhuis) <regressions@...mhuis.info> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 08.02.23 09:48, Chris Clayton wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm assuming  that we are not going to see a fix for this regression before 6.2 is released.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, looks like it. That's unfortunate, but happens. But there is still
>>>>>>>>>>> time to fix it and there is one thing I wonder:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Did any of the nouveau developers look at the netconsole captures Chris
>>>>>>>>>>> posted more than a week ago to check if they somehow help to track down
>>>>>>>>>>> the root of this problem?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I did now and I can't spot anything. I think at this point it would
>>>>>>>>>> make sense to dump the active tasks/threads via sqsrq keys to see if
>>>>>>>>>> any is in a weird state preventing the machine from shutting down.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Many thx for looking into it!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, thanks Karol.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Attached is the output from dmesg when this block of code:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>         /bin/mount /dev/sda7 /mnt/sda7
>>>>>>>>         /bin/mountpoint /proc || /bin/mount /proc
>>>>>>>>         /bin/dmesg -w > /mnt/sda7/sysrq.dmesg.log &
>>>>>>>>         /bin/echo t > /proc/sysrq-trigger
>>>>>>>>         /bin/sleep 1
>>>>>>>>         /bin/sync
>>>>>>>>         /bin/sleep 1
>>>>>>>>         kill $(pidof dmesg)
>>>>>>>>         /bin/umount /mnt/sda7
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> is executed immediately before /sbin/reboot is called as the final step of rebooting my system.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope this is what you were looking for, but if not, please let me know what you need
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Dave. [...]
>>>>> FWIW, in case anyone strands here in the archives: the msg was
>>>>> truncated. The full post can be found in a new thread:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e0b80506-b3cf-315b-4327-1b988d86031e@googlemail.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> Sadly it seems the info "With runpm=0, both reboot and poweroff work on
>>>>> my laptop." didn't bring us much further to a solution. :-/ I don't
>>>>> really like it, but for regression tracking I'm now putting this on the
>>>>> back-burner, as a fix is not in sight.
>>>>>
>>>>> #regzbot monitor:
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e0b80506-b3cf-315b-4327-1b988d86031e@googlemail.com/
>>>>> #regzbot backburner: hard to debug and apparently rare
>>>>> #regzbot ignore-activity
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> yeah.. this bug looks a little annoying. Sadly the only Turing based
>>>> laptop I got doesn't work on Nouveau because of firmware related
>>>> issues and we probably need to get updated ones from Nvidia here :(
>>>>
>>>> But it's a bit weird that the kernel doesn't shutdown, because I don't
>>>> see anything in the logs which would prevent that from happening.
>>>> Unless it's waiting on one of the tasks to complete, but none of them
>>>> looked in any way nouveau related.
>>>>
>>>> If somebody else has any fancy kernel debugging tips here to figure
>>>> out why it hangs, that would be very helpful...
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think I've figured this out. It's to do with how my system is configured. I do have an initrd, but the only thing on
>>> it is the cpu microcode which, it is recommended, should be loaded early. The absence of the NVidia firmare from an
>>> initrd doesn't matter because the drivers for the hardware that need to load firmware are all built as modules, So, by
>>> the time the devices are configured via udev, the root partition is mounted and the drivers can get at the firmware.
>>>
>>> I've found, by turning on nouveau debug and taking a video of the screen as the system shuts down, that nouveau seems to
>>> be trying to run the scrubber very very late in the shutdown process. The problem is that by this time, I think the root
>>> partition, and thus the scrubber binary, have become inaccessible.
>>>
>>> I seem to have two choices - either make the firmware accessible on an initrd or unload the module in a shutdown script
>>> before the scrubber binary becomes inaccessible. The latter of these is the workaround I have implemented whilst the
>>> problem I reported has been under investigation. For simplicity, I think I'll promote my workaround to being the
>>> permanent solution.
>>>
>>> So, apologies (and thanks) to everyone whose time I have taken up with this non-bug.
>>>
>>
>> Well.. nouveau shouldn't prevent the system from shutting down if the
>> firmware file isn't available. Or at least it should print a
>> warning/error. Mind messing with the code a little to see if skipping
>> it kind of works? I probably can also come up with a patch by next
>> week.
>>
> Well, I'd love to but a quick glance at the code caused me to bump into this obscenity:
> 
> int
> gm200_flcn_reset_wait_mem_scrubbing(struct nvkm_falcon *falcon)
> {
>         nvkm_falcon_mask(falcon, 0x040, 0x00000000, 0x00000000);
> 
>         if (nvkm_msec(falcon->owner->device, 10,
>                 if (!(nvkm_falcon_rd32(falcon, 0x10c) & 0x00000006))
>                         break;
>         ) < 0)
>                 return -ETIMEDOUT;
> 
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> nvkm_msec is #defined to nvkm_usec which in turn is #defined to nvkm_nsec where the loop that the break is related to
> appears

I think someone who knows the code needs to look at this. What I can confirm is that after a freeze, I waited for 90
seconds for a timeout to occur, but it didn't.


.> Chris
>>>
>>>>> Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
>>>>> --
>>>>> Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
>>>>> https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
>>>>> That page also explains what to do if mails like this annoy you.
>>>>>
>>>>> #regzbot ignore-activity
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists