From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9471C31E40 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 17:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1AC62067D for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 17:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727102AbfHLRYo (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:24:44 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:60428 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726453AbfHLRYo (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Aug 2019 13:24:44 -0400 Received: from p200300ddd71876867e7a91fffec98e25.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:dd:d718:7686:7e7a:91ff:fec9:8e25]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1hxE3j-0002Jy-TR; Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:24:39 +0200 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 19:24:34 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Woody Suwalski cc: LKML , "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: Kernel 5.3.x, 5.2.2+: VMware player suspend on 64/32 bit guests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <2e70a6e2-23a6-dbf2-4911-1e382469c9cb@gmail.com> <11dc5f68-b253-913a-4219-f6780c8967a0@intel.com> <594c424c-2474-5e2c-9ede-7e7dc68282d5@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? A: No. Q: Should I include quotations after my reply? http://daringfireball.net/2007/07/on_top Woody, On Mon, 12 Aug 2019, Woody Suwalski wrote: > I have added a timeout counter in __synchronize_hardirq(). > At the bottom I have converted while(inprogress); to while(inprogress > && timeout++ < 100); > > That is bypassing the suspend lockup problem. On both 32-bit and > 64-bit VMs the countdown is triggered by sync of irq9. So ACPI triggered an interrupt, which got already forwarded to a CPU, but it is not handled. That's more than strange. > Which probably means that there is some issue in ACPI handler and > synchronize_hardirq() is stuck on it? 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? Thanks, tglx