| Message ID | CAJZ5v0jgdctHEEOaAUBNZZPb=ni_DLdkJtmiDkvVP4WQUYr3rA@mail.gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 01:52:50AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > So we get the table, but apparently we crash when we attempt to put it. Right, except on 4.10-rc2 we don't crash but we freeze early. These are the last lines: ... [ 0.004778] mce: CPU supports 7 MCE banks [ 0.004861] LVT offset 1 assigned for vector 0xf9 [ 0.004945] Last level iTLB entries: 4KB 512, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512 [ 0.005025] Last level dTLB entries: 4KB 1024, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512, 1GB 0 [ 0.005165] Freeing SMP alternatives memory: 24K [ 0.211154] ftrace: allocating 25022 entries in 98 pages [ 0.219614] smpboot: Max logical packages: 2 <EOF> > Let's try to check the obvious just to rule it out (see attached), but > honestly I'm not sure what's going on in there. No change, same freeze. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 01:52:50AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> So we get the table, but apparently we crash when we attempt to put it. > > Right, except on 4.10-rc2 we don't crash but we freeze early. These are > the last lines: > > ... > [ 0.004778] mce: CPU supports 7 MCE banks > [ 0.004861] LVT offset 1 assigned for vector 0xf9 > [ 0.004945] Last level iTLB entries: 4KB 512, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512 > [ 0.005025] Last level dTLB entries: 4KB 1024, 2MB 1024, 4MB 512, 1GB 0 > [ 0.005165] Freeing SMP alternatives memory: 24K > [ 0.211154] ftrace: allocating 25022 entries in 98 pages > [ 0.219614] smpboot: Max logical packages: 2 > <EOF> > >> Let's try to check the obvious just to rule it out (see attached), but >> honestly I'm not sure what's going on in there. > > No change, same freeze. I was afraid that that would be the case. Can you try to comment out the acpi_put_table() in early_amd_iommu_init() and see if that makes any difference? Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--- drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_init.c | 9 ++++++--- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) Index: linux-pm/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_init.c =================================================================== --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_init.c +++ linux-pm/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu_init.c @@ -2337,8 +2337,10 @@ static int __init early_amd_iommu_init(v out: /* Don't leak any ACPI memory */ - acpi_put_table(ivrs_base); - ivrs_base = NULL; + if (ivrs_base) { + acpi_put_table(ivrs_base); + ivrs_base = NULL; + } return ret; } @@ -2372,7 +2374,8 @@ static bool detect_ivrs(void) return false; } - acpi_put_table(ivrs_base); + if (ivrs_base) + acpi_put_table(ivrs_base); /* Make sure ACS will be enabled during PCI probe */ pci_request_acs();