From owner-freebsd-usb@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 28 02:07:02 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE86106564A; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 02:07:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [84.237.50.39]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9239C8FC0A; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 02:07:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from regency.nsu.ru ([193.124.210.26]) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T6BCN-00008f-1f; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:06:35 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q7S28D6m065978; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:08:13 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id q7S27pLD065942; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:07:51 +0700 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:07:51 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Hans Petter Selasky Message-ID: <20120828020750.GA61543@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20120227152238.GA2940@regency.nsu.ru> <201203050710.22871.hselasky@c2i.net> <20120827125943.GA68575@regency.nsu.ru> <201208271734.54814.hselasky@c2i.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201208271734.54814.hselasky@c2i.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, freebsd-usb@freebsd.org, Jung-uk Kim Subject: Re: Resume broken in 8.3-PRERELEASE X-BeenThere: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD support for USB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 02:07:02 -0000 On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 05:34:54PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > If the USB HC is feeding too many such IRQ's it will be stuck. However, > if you see that "uhub_read_port_status()" is called, the kernel is at least > running, though it might be that some IRQ is stuck, hence the 100% CPU > usage. Could you try to get some IRQ stats? Before zzz'ing: db> show intrcnt irq1: atkbd0 168 irq9: acpi0 8300 irc12: psm0 2 irq14: ata0 6301 irq16: bge0 uhci3 13 irq23: uhci0 ehci0 2 cpu0: timer 7306385 irq256: hdac0 30 After (within a minute after botched resume) db> show intrcnt irq1: atkbd0 479 irq9: cdpi0 8379 irc12: psm0 2 irq14: ata0 6377 irq16: bge0 uhci3 26 irq23: uhci0 ehci0 5 cpu0: timer 7731880 irq256: hdac0 34 Not too much difference. Anything else I might get from DDB? Unfortunately, I am yet unable to save crashdump for later gdb analysis. ./danfe