| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <86802c440803291646i13ef28e6kf77f675dd6fb583c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 16:46:53 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To: "Jeff Garzik" <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, "Greg KH" <greg@...ah.com>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"kernel list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] e1000: fix IRQx nobody cared for shared irq with INTx
On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 2:15 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
>
> Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > when try to kexec one latest kernel from kernel.org from RHEL 5.1 got
> >
> > ACPI: PCI Interrupt 0000:02:00.0[A] -> Link [LNKA] -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19
> > acpi->mptable 2 : Int: type 0, pol 1, trig 1, bus 02, IRQ 00, APIC ID 0, APIC INT 13
> > PCI: Setting latency timer of device 0000:02:00.0 to 64
> > PCI: Enabling Mem-Wr-Inval for device 0000:02:00.0
> > scsi0 : on PCI bus 02 device 00 irq 19
> > irq 19: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option)
> > Pid: 1, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.24-smp-07682-g551e4fb-dirty #19
> >
> > Call Trace:
> > <IRQ> [<ffffffff8026a3eb>] __report_bad_irq+0x30/0x72
> > [<ffffffff8026a651>] note_interrupt+0x224/0x26f
> > [<ffffffff8026ae78>] handle_fasteoi_irq+0xa5/0xc8
> > [<ffffffff8021ffdc>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28
> > [<ffffffff802218e2>] do_IRQ+0xf1/0x15f
> > [<ffffffff8021f361>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa
> > <EOI> [<ffffffff80785bd6>] pci_mmcfg_write+0x0/0xb0
> > [<ffffffff80224dd9>] native_read_tsc+0xd/0x1d
> > [<ffffffff804681e7>] __delay+0x17/0x22
> > [<ffffffff805cb1a9>] lpfc_sli_brdrestart+0x14c/0x16b
> > [<ffffffff805cb264>] lpfc_do_config_port+0x9c/0x3e4
> > [<ffffffff802d77a9>] sysfs_link_sibling+0x17/0x31
> > [<ffffffff805cb674>] lpfc_sli_hba_setup+0xc8/0x4a2
> > [<ffffffff80825397>] lpfc_pci_probe_one+0x750/0x914
> > [<ffffffff804728f3>] pci_device_probe+0xb3/0xfb
> > [<ffffffff804d958c>] driver_probe_device+0xb5/0x132
> > [<ffffffff804d96ab>] __driver_attach+0x0/0x93
> > [<ffffffff804d9705>] __driver_attach+0x5a/0x93
> > [<ffffffff804d89bc>] bus_for_each_dev+0x44/0x6f
> > [<ffffffff804d91b9>] bus_add_driver+0xae/0x1f5
> > [<ffffffff804d990e>] driver_register+0x59/0xce
> > [<ffffffff80472b56>] __pci_register_driver+0x4a/0x7c
> > [<ffffffff80c2d78a>] lpfc_init+0x98/0xba
> > [<ffffffff80c0d6e7>] kernel_init+0x175/0x2e1
> > [<ffffffff8021fc68>] child_rip+0xa/0x12
> > [<ffffffff80c0d572>] kernel_init+0x0/0x2e1
> > [<ffffffff8021fc5e>] child_rip+0x0/0x12
> >
> > handlers:
> > [<ffffffff805cdbce>] (lpfc_intr_handler+0x0/0x4c6)
> > Disabling IRQ #19
> >
> > root caused that there is one Intel card that shared io apic pin and irq with
> > lpfc
> >
> > e1000_probe path only use pci_enable_device to setup irq entry but masked, and
> > will use e1000_open to use request_irq/setup_irq to install action and
> > enable/unmask that io apic entry.
> >
> > but lpfc driver will call it's probe and request_irq/setup_irq. so it
> > enable/umask that io apic entry. and only lpfc's action the lpfc_intr_handler
> > is installed.
> >
> > and some case, the e1000 sent out irq (hw bug or first kernel doesn't call
> > e1000_irq_disable?)
> > that irq will confuse the hanlder ... it is not for lpfc_intr_handler...
> >
> > So try to call pci_intx(dev, 0) in e1000_probe,
> > and later call pci_intx(dev, 1) after request_irq in e1000_open patch, if the
> > irq is using INTx
> >
> > even e1000 is using MSI, still need this patch. Because even pci_enable_msi in
> > e1000_open path will call pci_intx(dev, 0), that is too late. when we have lpfc
> > driver loaded before use ifconfig to set network connection.
> >
> > othe drivers may need to be updated in the same way, if they have same problem
> > like nobody cared irq with shared INTx irq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
> > @@ -324,6 +324,9 @@ static int e1000_request_irq(struct e100
> > pci_disable_msi(adapter->pdev);
> > DPRINTK(PROBE, ERR,
> > "Unable to allocate interrupt Error: %d\n", err);
> > + } else if (!adapter->have_msi) {
> > + /* enable INTx before if not using MSI */
> > + pci_intx(adapter->pdev, 1);
> > }
> >
> > return err;
> > @@ -934,6 +937,8 @@ e1000_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> > uint16_t eeprom_apme_mask = E1000_EEPROM_APME;
> > DECLARE_MAC_BUF(mac);
> >
> > + /* disable INTx at first */
> > + pci_intx(pdev, 0);
> > if ((err = pci_enable_device(pdev)))
> > return err;
> >
> > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c
> > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/net/e1000e/netdev.c
> > @@ -960,6 +960,9 @@ static int e1000_request_irq(struct e100
> > err);
> > if (adapter->flags & FLAG_MSI_ENABLED)
> > pci_disable_msi(adapter->pdev);
> > + } else if (!(adapter->flags & FLAG_MSI_ENABLED)) {
> > + /* enable INTx before if not using MSI */
> > + pci_intx(adapter->pdev, 1);
> > }
> >
> > return err;
>
> These seem sane.
>
>
>
> > @@ -3726,6 +3729,8 @@ static int __devinit e1000_probe(struct
> > u16 eeprom_apme_mask = E1000_EEPROM_APME;
> >
> > e1000e_disable_l1aspm(pdev);
> > + /* disable INTx at first */
> > + pci_intx(pdev, 0);
> > err = pci_enable_device(pdev);
> > if (err)
> > return err;
>
> Any pci_* call before pci_enable_device() is questionable. I would put
> it after pci_enable_device(), unless there is a _strong_ reason.
>
> PCI devices are not considered available, with resources assigned, until
> pci_enable_device()
>
> I am also curious what irq events are being raised? That seems like
> another problem area to address, since pci_intx() is just a band-aid
> hiding that behavior.
in comments,
> > and some case, the e1000 sent out irq (hw bug or first kernel doesn't call
> > e1000_irq_disable?)
YH
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists