From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chen Fan <chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: fix unavailable irq number 255 reported by BIOS
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:56:43 +0800
Message-ID: <569F138B.2010004@cn.fujitsu.com>
References: <1453167913-16248-1-git-send-email-chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>	<6239489.QX2A2kAHWp@vostro.rjw.lan>	<2316565.SNckEMXyKO@vostro.rjw.lan>	<569E4CCD.6040901@codeaurora.org> <CAJZ5v0h9RCaM9AwtV9=YSFhkiVoy0JeXt6muOqCVTt+MbOEKQA@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:3712 "EHLO
	heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933745AbcATFB0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:01:26 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0h9RCaM9AwtV9=YSFhkiVoy0JeXt6muOqCVTt+MbOEKQA@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com, wency@cn.fujitsu.com, caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>


On 01/19/2016 11:39 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 1/19/2016 9:20 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 02:43:30 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 09:45:13 AM Chen Fan wrote:
>>>>> In our environment, when enable Secure boot, we found an abnormal
>>>>> phenomenon as following call trace shows. after investigation, we
>>>>> found the firmware assigned an irq number 255 which means unknown
>>>>> or no connection in PCI local spec for i801_smbus, meanwhile the
>>>>> ACPI didn't configure the pci irq routing. and the 255 irq number
>>>>> was assigned for megasa msix without IRQF_SHARED. then in this case
>>>>> during i801_smbus probe, the i801_smbus driver would request irq with
>>>>> bad irq number 255. but the 255 irq number was assigned for memgasa
>>>>> with MSIX enable. which will cause request_irq fails, and call trace
>>>>> shows, actually, we should expose the error early, rather than in request
>>>>> irq, here we simply fix the problem by return err when find the irq is
>>>>> 255.
>>>>>
>>>>> See the call trace:
>>>>>
>>>>>   [   32.459195] ipmi device interface
>>>>>   [   32.612907] shpchp: Standard Hot Plug PCI Controller Driver version: 0.4
>>>>>   [   32.800459] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver - version 4.0.1-k-rh
>>>>>   [   32.818319] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2014 Intel Corporation.
>>>>>   [   32.844009] lpc_ich 0001:80:1f.0: I/O space for ACPI uninitialized
>>>>>   [   32.850093] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: enabling device (0140 -> 0143)
>>>>>   [   32.851134] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: can't derive routing for PCI INT C
>>>>>   [   32.851136] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: PCI INT C: no GSI
>>>>>   [   32.851164] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 255. 00000080 (i801_smbus) vs. 00000000 (megasa
>>>>>   [   32.851168] CPU: 0 PID: 2487 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 3.10.0-229.el7.x86_64 #1
>>>>>   [   32.851170] Hardware name: FUJITSU PRIMEQUEST 2800E2/D3736, BIOS PRIMEQUEST 2000 Serie5
>>>>>   [   32.851178] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
>>>>>   [   32.851208]  ffff88086c330b00 00000000e233a9df ffff88086d57bca0 ffffffff81603f36
>>>>>   [   32.851227]  ffff88086d57bcf8 ffffffff8110d23a ffff88686fe02000 0000000000000246
>>>>>   [   32.851246]  ffff88086a9a8c00 00000000e233a9df ffffffffa00ad220 0000000000000080
>>>>>   [   32.851247] Call Trace:
>>>>>   [   32.851261]  [<ffffffff81603f36>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
>>>>>   [   32.851271]  [<ffffffff8110d23a>] __setup_irq+0x54a/0x570
>>>>>   [   32.851282]  [<ffffffffa00ad220>] ? i801_check_pre.isra.5+0xe0/0xe0 [i2c_i801]
>>>>>   [   32.851289]  [<ffffffff8110d3bc>] request_threaded_irq+0xcc/0x170
>>>>>   [   32.851298]  [<ffffffffa00ae87f>] i801_probe+0x32f/0x508 [i2c_i801]
>>>>>   [   32.851308]  [<ffffffff81308385>] local_pci_probe+0x45/0xa0
>>>>>   [   32.851315]  [<ffffffff8108bfd4>] work_for_cpu_fn+0x14/0x20
>>>>>   [   32.851323]  [<ffffffff8108f0ab>] process_one_work+0x17b/0x470
>>>>>   [   32.851330]  [<ffffffff81090003>] worker_thread+0x293/0x400
>>>>>   [   32.851338]  [<ffffffff8108fd70>] ? rescuer_thread+0x400/0x400
>>>>>   [   32.851346]  [<ffffffff8109726f>] kthread+0xcf/0xe0
>>>>>   [   32.851353]  [<ffffffff810971a0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>>>>   [   32.851362]  [<ffffffff81613cfc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
>>>>>   [   32.851369]  [<ffffffff810971a0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>>>>   [   32.851373] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: Failed to allocate irq 255: -16
>>>>>   [   32.851435] i801_smbus: probe of 0000:00:1f.3 failed with error -16
>>>>>   [   33.180145] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: Multiq[   33.240538] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: (PCI Express:03:e0
>>>>>   [   33.280826] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: MAC: 3, PHY: 0, PBA No: 000000-000
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Fan <chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c | 10 +++++++++-
>>>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> index d30184c..d2f47f8 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> @@ -439,9 +439,17 @@ int acpi_pci_irq_enable(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>>>>              if (acpi_isa_register_gsi(dev))
>>>>>                      dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI\n",
>>>>>                               pin_name(pin));
>>>>> +           rc = 0;
>>>>> +           /*
>>>>> +            * Excluding the BIOS report the value 255, which meaning
>>>>> +            * "unknown" or "no connection" in PCI Local Bus Specification
>>>>> +            * Revision 3.0 February 3, 2004, P223.
>>>> You mean the footnote on page 223 talking about the Interrupt Line values, right?
>> "Unknown" does not necessarily mean invalid. I have a platform that is using 255 as a valid legacy
>> interrupt on PCI Express.
> So first off this is about the Interrupt Line value not about an
> interrupt vector.
>
> Second, the footnote in question is talking about x86 PCs, so if your
> platform is not one of them, there is no connection here.
>
> Which means that the change should be limited to x86 probably.
That's right, we should wrap this code in arch x86.

Thanks,
Chen

>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
>
> .
>




From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S933848AbcATFBm (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:01:42 -0500
Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([59.151.112.132]:3712 "EHLO
	heian.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933745AbcATFB0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 20 Jan 2016 00:01:26 -0500
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.20,346,1444665600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="2772946"
Message-ID: <569F138B.2010004@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:56:43 +0800
From: Chen Fan <chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, <izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>,
        <wency@cn.fujitsu.com>, <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: fix unavailable irq number 255 reported by BIOS
References: <1453167913-16248-1-git-send-email-chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>	<6239489.QX2A2kAHWp@vostro.rjw.lan>	<2316565.SNckEMXyKO@vostro.rjw.lan>	<569E4CCD.6040901@codeaurora.org> <CAJZ5v0h9RCaM9AwtV9=YSFhkiVoy0JeXt6muOqCVTt+MbOEKQA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0h9RCaM9AwtV9=YSFhkiVoy0JeXt6muOqCVTt+MbOEKQA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.167.226.78]
X-yoursite-MailScanner-ID: 76C8E41896FE.A6774
X-yoursite-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-yoursite-MailScanner-From: chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


On 01/19/2016 11:39 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 1/19/2016 9:20 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 02:43:30 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 09:45:13 AM Chen Fan wrote:
>>>>> In our environment, when enable Secure boot, we found an abnormal
>>>>> phenomenon as following call trace shows. after investigation, we
>>>>> found the firmware assigned an irq number 255 which means unknown
>>>>> or no connection in PCI local spec for i801_smbus, meanwhile the
>>>>> ACPI didn't configure the pci irq routing. and the 255 irq number
>>>>> was assigned for megasa msix without IRQF_SHARED. then in this case
>>>>> during i801_smbus probe, the i801_smbus driver would request irq with
>>>>> bad irq number 255. but the 255 irq number was assigned for memgasa
>>>>> with MSIX enable. which will cause request_irq fails, and call trace
>>>>> shows, actually, we should expose the error early, rather than in request
>>>>> irq, here we simply fix the problem by return err when find the irq is
>>>>> 255.
>>>>>
>>>>> See the call trace:
>>>>>
>>>>>   [   32.459195] ipmi device interface
>>>>>   [   32.612907] shpchp: Standard Hot Plug PCI Controller Driver version: 0.4
>>>>>   [   32.800459] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver - version 4.0.1-k-rh
>>>>>   [   32.818319] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2014 Intel Corporation.
>>>>>   [   32.844009] lpc_ich 0001:80:1f.0: I/O space for ACPI uninitialized
>>>>>   [   32.850093] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: enabling device (0140 -> 0143)
>>>>>   [   32.851134] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: can't derive routing for PCI INT C
>>>>>   [   32.851136] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: PCI INT C: no GSI
>>>>>   [   32.851164] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 255. 00000080 (i801_smbus) vs. 00000000 (megasa
>>>>>   [   32.851168] CPU: 0 PID: 2487 Comm: kworker/0:1 Not tainted 3.10.0-229.el7.x86_64 #1
>>>>>   [   32.851170] Hardware name: FUJITSU PRIMEQUEST 2800E2/D3736, BIOS PRIMEQUEST 2000 Serie5
>>>>>   [   32.851178] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
>>>>>   [   32.851208]  ffff88086c330b00 00000000e233a9df ffff88086d57bca0 ffffffff81603f36
>>>>>   [   32.851227]  ffff88086d57bcf8 ffffffff8110d23a ffff88686fe02000 0000000000000246
>>>>>   [   32.851246]  ffff88086a9a8c00 00000000e233a9df ffffffffa00ad220 0000000000000080
>>>>>   [   32.851247] Call Trace:
>>>>>   [   32.851261]  [<ffffffff81603f36>] dump_stack+0x19/0x1b
>>>>>   [   32.851271]  [<ffffffff8110d23a>] __setup_irq+0x54a/0x570
>>>>>   [   32.851282]  [<ffffffffa00ad220>] ? i801_check_pre.isra.5+0xe0/0xe0 [i2c_i801]
>>>>>   [   32.851289]  [<ffffffff8110d3bc>] request_threaded_irq+0xcc/0x170
>>>>>   [   32.851298]  [<ffffffffa00ae87f>] i801_probe+0x32f/0x508 [i2c_i801]
>>>>>   [   32.851308]  [<ffffffff81308385>] local_pci_probe+0x45/0xa0
>>>>>   [   32.851315]  [<ffffffff8108bfd4>] work_for_cpu_fn+0x14/0x20
>>>>>   [   32.851323]  [<ffffffff8108f0ab>] process_one_work+0x17b/0x470
>>>>>   [   32.851330]  [<ffffffff81090003>] worker_thread+0x293/0x400
>>>>>   [   32.851338]  [<ffffffff8108fd70>] ? rescuer_thread+0x400/0x400
>>>>>   [   32.851346]  [<ffffffff8109726f>] kthread+0xcf/0xe0
>>>>>   [   32.851353]  [<ffffffff810971a0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>>>>   [   32.851362]  [<ffffffff81613cfc>] ret_from_fork+0x7c/0xb0
>>>>>   [   32.851369]  [<ffffffff810971a0>] ? kthread_create_on_node+0x140/0x140
>>>>>   [   32.851373] i801_smbus 0000:00:1f.3: Failed to allocate irq 255: -16
>>>>>   [   32.851435] i801_smbus: probe of 0000:00:1f.3 failed with error -16
>>>>>   [   33.180145] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: Multiq[   33.240538] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: (PCI Express:03:e0
>>>>>   [   33.280826] ixgbe 0000:5a:00.0: MAC: 3, PHY: 0, PBA No: 000000-000
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Fan <chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>   drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c | 10 +++++++++-
>>>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> index d30184c..d2f47f8 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_irq.c
>>>>> @@ -439,9 +439,17 @@ int acpi_pci_irq_enable(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>>>>              if (acpi_isa_register_gsi(dev))
>>>>>                      dev_warn(&dev->dev, "PCI INT %c: no GSI\n",
>>>>>                               pin_name(pin));
>>>>> +           rc = 0;
>>>>> +           /*
>>>>> +            * Excluding the BIOS report the value 255, which meaning
>>>>> +            * "unknown" or "no connection" in PCI Local Bus Specification
>>>>> +            * Revision 3.0 February 3, 2004, P223.
>>>> You mean the footnote on page 223 talking about the Interrupt Line values, right?
>> "Unknown" does not necessarily mean invalid. I have a platform that is using 255 as a valid legacy
>> interrupt on PCI Express.
> So first off this is about the Interrupt Line value not about an
> interrupt vector.
>
> Second, the footnote in question is talking about x86 PCs, so if your
> platform is not one of them, there is no connection here.
>
> Which means that the change should be limited to x86 probably.
That's right, we should wrap this code in arch x86.

Thanks,
Chen

>
> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
>
> .
>