linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.33: Problem continues: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:404 hpet_next

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]

Message-ID: <20100225185348.GA9674@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:53:48 -0800
From:	"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
To:	Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.33: Problem continues: WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:404 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 03:37:04PM -0800, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Again, on the Intel DP55KG board:
> 
> # uname -a
> Linux host 2.6.33 #1 SMP Wed Feb 24 18:31:00 EST 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> 
> [    1.237600] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [    1.237890] WARNING: at arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c:404 hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80()
> [    1.238221] Hardware name:
> [    1.238504] hpet: compare register read back failed.
> [    1.238793] Modules linked in:
> [    1.239315] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.33 #1
> [    1.239605] Call Trace:
> [    1.239886]  <IRQ>  [<ffffffff81056c13>] ? warn_slowpath_common+0x73/0xb0
> [    1.240409]  [<ffffffff81079608>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x38/0xc0
> [    1.240699]  [<ffffffff81056cb0>] ? warn_slowpath_fmt+0x40/0x50
> [    1.240992]  [<ffffffff81079608>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x38/0xc0
> [    1.241281]  [<ffffffff81041ad0>] ? hpet_next_event+0x70/0x80
> [    1.241573]  [<ffffffff81079608>] ? tick_dev_program_event+0x38/0xc0
> [    1.241859]  [<ffffffff81078e32>] ? tick_handle_oneshot_broadcast+0xe2/0x100
> [    1.246533]  [<ffffffff8102a67a>] ? timer_interrupt+0x1a/0x30
> [    1.246826]  [<ffffffff81085499>] ? handle_IRQ_event+0x39/0xd0
> [    1.247118]  [<ffffffff81087368>] ? handle_edge_irq+0xb8/0x160
> [    1.247407]  [<ffffffff81029f55>] ? handle_irq+0x15/0x20
> [    1.247689]  [<ffffffff810294a2>] ? do_IRQ+0x62/0xe0
> [    1.247976]  [<ffffffff8146be53>] ? ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa
> [    1.248262]  <EOI>  [<ffffffff8102f277>] ? mwait_idle+0x57/0x80
> [    1.248796]  [<ffffffff8102645c>] ? cpu_idle+0x5c/0xb0
> [    1.249080] ---[ end trace db7f668fb6fef4e1 ]---
> 
> Is this something Intel has to fix or is it a bug in the kernel?

This is a chipset erratum.

Thomas: You mentioned we can retain this check only for known-buggy and
hpet debug kind of options. But here is the simple workaround patch for
this particular erratum.

x86: Erratum workaround for read after write of HPET comparator

Some chipsets have a erratum due to which read immediately following a
write of HPET comparator returns old comparator value instead of most
recently written value.

Erratum 15 in
"Intel I/O Controller Hub 9 (ICH9) Family Specification Update"
(http://www.intel.com/assets/pdf/specupdate/316973.pdf)

Workaround for the errata is to read the comparator twice if the first
one fails.

Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c |    8 +++++++-
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
index ad80a1c..7b0dd63 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
@@ -399,9 +399,15 @@ static int hpet_next_event(unsigned long delta,
 	 * then we might have a real hardware problem. We can not do
 	 * much about it here, but at least alert the user/admin with
 	 * a prominent warning.
+	 * An erratum on some chipsets (ICH9,..), results in comparator read
+	 * immediately following a write returning old value. Workaround
+	 * for this is to read this value second time, when first
+	 * read returns old value.
 	 */
-	WARN_ONCE(hpet_readl(HPET_Tn_CMP(timer)) != cnt,
+	if (unlikely((u32)hpet_readl(HPET_Tn_CMP(timer)) != cnt)) {
+		WARN_ONCE(hpet_readl(HPET_Tn_CMP(timer)) != cnt,
 		  KERN_WARNING "hpet: compare register read back failed.\n");
+	}
 
 	return (s32)(hpet_readl(HPET_COUNTER) - cnt) >= 0 ? -ETIME : 0;
 }
-- 
1.6.0.6

--
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/