linux-kernel - Re: [regression] Bug 217218 - Trying to boot Linux version 6-2.2 kernel with Marvell SATA controller 88SE9235

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

Message-ID: <07ee0cf7-a5c2-f87a-d627-8dd8fb082345@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Apr 2023 15:07:20 +0100
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Jason Adriaanse <jason_a69@...oo.co.uk>, hch@....de
Cc:     baolu.lu@...ux.intel.com, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        regressions@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [regression] Bug 217218 - Trying to boot Linux version 6-2.2
 kernel with Marvell SATA controller 88SE9235

On 2023-04-24 14:44, Jason Adriaanse wrote:
> I took out "iommu=soft" and the server failed to boot, so yes it does 
> break.
> 
> The first error was
> ata7.00: Failed to IDENTIFY (INIT_DEV_PARAMS failed , err_mask=0x80)

OK, great, that confirms the underlying issue existed all along, so the 
regression is only a change in who wins a fight between certain 
conflicting command-line arguments, which is arguably not so critical.

The rest of the evidence points to 88SE9235 wanting the same phantom 
function quirk as most other Marvell controllers, since although it's 
apparently been half-fixed such that DMA for two of the ports is being 
correctly emitted from function 0 - given that you say two of the disks 
*are* detected OK - the other two are still claiming to be function 1 
after all.

Thanks,
Robin.

> On 24/04/2023 21:20, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2023-04-22 07:25, Jason Adriaanse wrote:
>>> Hi Christoph,
>>>
>>> Sorry for my late reply, I have been on the road.
>>>
>>> So, if I boot with
>>> intel_iommu=off
>>> Then the server boots fine..although that is not a solution because I 
>>> need Intel iommu for virtualisation.
>>>
>>> Also, I build all my kernels with CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU=y
>>>
>>
>> If you boot 5.15 *without* the "iommu=soft" argument, just 
>> "intel_iommu=on", does that also break?
>>
>> Robin.