linux-kernel - Re: Samsung N130 ATA exception after 5min uptime -- Phoenix FailSafe issue?

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 4 Jan 2010 01:41:47 +0100
From:	Johannes Stezenbach <js@...21.net>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Hans Werner <HWerner4@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	trenn@...e.de, mmalygin@....de, hancockrwd@...il.com,
	greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: Samsung N130 ATA exception after 5min uptime -- Phoenix
 FailSafe issue?

On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 07:59:59AM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On 01/04/2010 07:11 AM, Johannes Stezenbach wrote:
> > 
> > FWIW, I just tested a current git kernel (v2.6.33-rc2-268-g45d28b0)
> > with Tejun's patch applied on my N130.  The ATA exception and hang is
> > indeed gone, just "ata1: clearing spurious IRQ" is logged.
> > 
> > I've see Tejun's comment in
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14314
> > and I would like to add that the ATA irq is not shared.
> > 
> >  14:      43885          0   IO-APIC-edge      ata_piix
> >  15:          0          0   IO-APIC-edge      ata_piix
> 
> Can you please post that on bug#14314?  If the IRQ line indeed wasn't
> shared, it might mean that the controller raised the IRQ line before
> getting its internal state in order and the IRQ checking sequence
> cleared the external IRQ status while leaving the internal pending bit
> intact, which I've never heard of on piix and don't think is possible.
> Hmmmm... given that the problem was dependent on BIOS on the other
> model (is it the N130?), maybe the BIOS is doing something funny.  :-(
> Anyways, please post full output of "cat /proc/interrupts" at the bz.

I've updated bug#14314.  It is certainly a BIOS issue, but the
"spurious IRQ" check deals way better with it than the previous
30sec hang waiting for timeout.  IMHO the patch should be merged
into mainline asap.  Or do you think it has any downside?


Thanks
Johannes
--
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/