linux-kernel - Re: 4.7 regression: ACPI: No IRQ available for PCI Interrupt Link [LNKD]. Try pci=noacpi or acpi=off

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:   Fri, 30 Sep 2016 09:14:42 -0400
From:   okaya@...eaurora.org
To:     Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        wim@....tudelft.nl, ravikanth.nalla@....com
Subject: Re: 4.7 regression: ACPI: No IRQ available for PCI Interrupt Link
 [LNKD]. Try pci=noacpi or acpi=off

On 2016-09-30 02:44, Ondrej Zary wrote:
> On Friday 30 September 2016, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>> On 9/29/2016 2:00 PM, Ondrej Zary wrote:
>> >> The previous two patches were in the right direction.
>> >>
>> >> > Can we also get the same output from 4.6 kernel with the attached
>> >> > patch for the same machine you sent these?
>> >
>> > Here it is.
>> >
>> >> > Something about SCI still doesn't feel right.
>> >> >
>> >> > The IRQ assignment fails if the penalty is greater than
>> >> > PIRQ_PENALTY_ISA_ALWAYS. This will happen if BIOS tells us to use an
>> >> > IRQ and same IRQ is in use by the SCI.
>> 
>> Thanks, I reverted penalize_sci function and dropped patch #1. Can you 
>> try
>> this again?
> 
> It seems to work, at least on one machine.

Ok, that comfirms my suspicion. We are  having trouble detecting sci 
interrupt  type and we end up penalizing the wrong value.

Can you try your other machines too?

I need to do some research now.