| 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: <569F138B.2010004@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 12:56:43 +0800 From: Chen Fan <chen.fan.fnst@...fujitsu.com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org> CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, <izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>, <wency@...fujitsu.com>, <caoj.fnst@...fujitsu.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: fix unavailable irq number 255 reported by BIOS On 01/19/2016 11:39 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.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@...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 > > > . >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists