linux-kernel - Re: Regression in 6.8 from "ACPI: OSL: Use a threaded interrupt handler for SCI"

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]

Message-ID: <67d74985-7be5-4e29-aab2-97a08208ca3f@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2024 15:50:16 +0200
From: "Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
To: Stefan Seyfried <stefan.seyfried@...glemail.com>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression in 6.8 from "ACPI: OSL: Use a threaded interrupt
 handler for SCI"

Hi,

On 7/8/2024 10:07 AM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> any kernels after 6.7 break my trusty old Toughbook CF-51 by rendering 
> many PCI devices unusable.
>
> I did first notice that i915 did no longer work and filed
> https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/i915/kernel/-/issues/11437, there I 
> was pointed to commit
>
> commit 7a36b901a6eb0e9945341db71ed3c45c7721cfa9
> Author: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Date:   Mon Nov 27 20:57:43 2023 +0100
>
>     ACPI: OSL: Use a threaded interrupt handler for SCI
>
> which I verified with a week-long bisecting from 6.7 to 6.8 (just for 
> fun :-)
>
Thanks for reporting this, although it would be nice to put linux-acpi 
on the CC.


> Just reverting this commit top of 6.10-rc5 (sorry, this machine is not 
> very powerful so I did not try the latest git master) makes everything 
> work fine again.
>
> I get these messages in dmesg when running the broken kernels:
>
> [  T308] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (yenta) vs. 00002080 
> (acpi)
> [  T305] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (uhci_hcd:usb1) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [  T305] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (uhci_hcd:usb1) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [   T46] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (ehci_hcd:usb1) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [  T312] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (firewire_ohci) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [  T305] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (uhci_hcd:usb1) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [  T308] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (yenta) vs. 00002080 
> (acpi)
> [  T592] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (snd_intel8x0) vs. 
> 00002080 (acpi)
> [  T581] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (i915) vs. 00002080 
> (acpi)
> [  T874] genirq: Flags mismatch irq 9. 00000080 (enp2s1) vs. 00002080 
> (acpi)
>
> These are not present with that commit reverted.
>
So all of the drivers above attempt to share the IRQ with the SCI and 
they don't use IRQF_ONESHOT and because they all are threaded, there is 
a flags conflict.

They all need to be made pass IRQF_COND_ONESHOT when requesting 
interrupts and it will all work again.

I'll send you a patch for this (hopefully later today), but I guess it 
will take a while until it gets absorbed.

Thanks!