[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ba78805af8b39237b22a0ff87c4ba3c614a43910.camel@xry111.site>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 18:15:50 +0800
From: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
To: Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@...ux.intel.com>, Bjorn Helgaas
<helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: Grant Grundler <grundler@...omium.org>, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, mahesh@...ux.ibm.com, oohall@...il.com,
rajat.khandelwal@...ux.intel.com, rajatja@...omium.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 pci-next 1/2] PCI/AER: correctable error message as
KERN_INFO
On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 16:45 +0800, Ethan Zhao wrote:
> On 3/25/2024 1:19 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 14:39 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 07:42:30PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > > > ...
> > > > My workstation suffers from too much correctable AER reporting as well
> > > > (related to Intel's errata "RPL013: Incorrectly Formed PCIe Packets May
> > > > Generate Correctable Errors" and/or the motherboard design, I guess).
> > > We should rate-limit correctable error reporting so it's not
> > > overwhelming.
> > >
> > > At the same time, I'm *also* interested in the cause of these errors,
> > > in case there's a Linux defect or a hardware erratum that we can work
> > > around. Do you have a bug report with any more details, e.g., a dmesg
> > > log and "sudo lspci -vv" output?
> > Hi Bjorn,
> >
> > Sorry for the *very* late reply (somehow I didn't see the reply at all
> > before it was removed by my cron job, and now I just savaged it from
> > lore.kernel.org...)
> >
> > The dmesg is like:
> >
> > [ 882.456994] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1
> > [ 882.457002] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: found no error details for 0000:00:1c.1
> > [ 882.457003] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:06:00.0
> > [ 883.545763] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1
> > [ 883.545789] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Physical Layer, (Receiver ID)
> > [ 883.545790] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: device [8086:7a39] error status/mask=00000001/00002000
> > [ 883.545792] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: [ 0] RxErr (First)
> > [ 883.545794] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Error of this Agent is reported first
> > [ 883.545798] r8169 0000:06:00.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Physical Layer, (Transmitter ID)
> > [ 883.545799] r8169 0000:06:00.0: device [10ec:8125] error status/mask=00001101/0000e000
> > [ 883.545800] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [ 0] RxErr (First)
> > [ 883.545801] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [ 8] Rollover
> > [ 883.545802] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [12] Timeout
> > [ 883.545815] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1
> > [ 883.545823] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: found no error details for 0000:00:1c.1
> > [ 883.545824] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:06:00.0
> >
> > lspci output attached.
> >
> > Intel has issued an errata "RPL013" saying:
> >
> > "Under complex microarchitectural conditions, the PCIe controller may
> > transmit an incorrectly formed Transaction Layer Packet (TLP), which
> > will fail CRC checks. When this erratum occurs, the PCIe end point may
> > record correctable errors resulting in either a NAK or link recovery.
> > Intel® has not observed any functional impact due to this erratum."
> >
> > But I'm really unsure if it describes my issue.
> >
> > Do you think I have some broken hardware and I should replace the CPU
> > and/or the motherboard (where the r8169 is soldered)? I've noticed that
> > my 13900K is almost impossible to overclock (despite it's a K), but I've
> > not encountered any issue other than these AER reporting so far after I
> > gave up overclocking.
>
> Seems there are two r8169 nics on your board, only 0000:06:00.0 reports
> aer errors, how about another one the 0000:07:00.0 nic ?
It never happens to 0000:07:00.0, even if I plug the ethernet cable into
it instead of 0000:06:00.0.
Maybe I should just use 0000:07:00.0 and blacklist 0000:06:00.0 as I
don't need two NICs?
--
Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
Powered by blists - more mailing lists