linux-kernel - Re: common_interrupt: No irq handler for vector

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c270b5af-1720-7dc6-cdd5-e9d8611a1704@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 14 Dec 2020 15:41:21 -0700
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: common_interrupt: No irq handler for vector

On 12/14/20 3:28 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Shuah,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 14 2020 at 13:57, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 12/14/20 1:41 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Here is the processor and BIOS info:
>> AMD Ryzen 7 4700G with Radeon Graphics
>> LENOVO ThinkCentre Embedded Controller -[O4ZCT12A-1.12]-
>> LENOVO ThinkCentre BIOS Boot Block Revision 1.1C
>>
>>>
>>>> I am bisecting to isolate. Same issue on all stables 5.4, 4.19 and
>>>> so on. If it is BIOS problem I would expect to see it on 5.10-rc7
>>>> and wouldn't have expected to start seeing it 5.9.9.
>>>
>>> Can you provide some more details, e.g. dmesg please?
>>>
>>
>> __common_interrupt: 1.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 2.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 3.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 4.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 5.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 6.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 7.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 8.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 9.55 No irq handler for vector
>> __common_interrupt: 10.55 No irq handler for vector
> 
> This _IS_ the AGESA BIOS bug.
> 
>>>>> No. It's perfectly correct in the MSI code. See further down.
>>>>>
>>>>> 	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this_cpu_read(vector_irq[cfg->vector])))
>>>>> 		this_cpu_write(vector_irq[cfg->vector], VECTOR_RETRIGGERED);
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am asking about inconsistent comments and the actual message as the
>>>> comment implies if vector is VECTOR_UNUSED state, this message won't
>>>> be triggered in common_interrupt. Based on that my read is the comment
>>>> might be wrong if the code is correct as you are saying.
>>>
>>> The comment says:
>>>
>>>     >>    * anyway. If the vector is unused, then it is marked so it won't
>>>     >>    * trigger the 'No irq handler for vector' warning in
>>>     >>    * common_interrupt().
>>>
>>>     If the vector is unused, then it is _marked_ so ....
>>
>> See the messages above.
> 
> This code has absolutely nothing to do with these messages and this code
> marks the vector RETRIGGERED so the warning cannot happen if the MSI
> migration causes this spurious vector to be emitted. That marking is
> there _because_ the migration triggered the warning occasionally which
> is unavoidable due the silliness of hardware.
> 
> The problem is that the buggy BIOS causes vector 55 which is the legacy
> X86 interrupt 7 to be sent to the secondary CPUs 1-10 when they come up
> the first time during boot. This has been reported to death already and
> AMD confirmed that it is an AGESA BIOS bug and that it is fixed with
> AGESA BIOS version 1.1.8.0.
> 
> The reason why it shows up now might be timing related, nothing else.
> 

Thank you for confirming. I will save myself the bisect time and look
for BIOS update.

thanks,
-- Shuah