linux-kernel - Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] "xHCI host controller not responding, assume dead" on stable kernel

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]

Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 07:45:07 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Cc: Gia <giacomo.gio@...il.com>, "S, Sanath" <Sanath.S@....com>,
	Benjamin Böhmke <benjamin@...hmke.net>,
	Christian Heusel <christian@...sel.eu>,
	Linux regressions mailing list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kernel@...ha.zone" <kernel@...ha.zone>,
	Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
	Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
	Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] "xHCI host controller not responding,
 assume dead" on stable kernel > 6.8.7

On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 10:19:51AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 5/22/2024 09:41, Gia wrote:
> > Now this is odd...
> > 
> > I've tested another cable - a very short one used with a Gen3 nvme
> > enclosure that I'm sure it's working - and I got Gen2 20 Gbps. I also
> > have tested this on Windows 11 and I still just got a Gen2 connection.
> > 
> > I was almost sure it was caused by a bad USB4 implementation by the PC
> > manufacturer, then I tried to connect a Thunderbolt 3 disk enclosure
> > via daisy chain to the Caldigit dock and I got the full Gen3 40 Gbps
> > connection! See the attached picture.
> > 
> 
> I suspect you can't actually get Gen 3 performance in this configuration.
> IIUC you should still be limited by the uplink to the host.

One "explanation" could be that the distance from the SoC to the Type-C
connector is relatively long which would require a retimer to get the
Gen3 speeds.