| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAA85sZsiuE9rN7uVCuhgiki-rffo4mYbh6BKvuGaJAK5CsPgKw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 12:20:53 +0100
From: Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@...il.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>,
linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
"Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@...il.com>,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@...il.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI/ASPM: Use the path max in L1 ASPM latency check
On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 1:08 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 02:09:12PM +0100, Ian Kumlien wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 1:40 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:56:31PM +0100, Ian Kumlien wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 8:19 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > If you're interested, you could probably unload the Realtek drivers,
> > > > > remove the devices, and set the PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_LD (Link Disable) bit
> > > > > in 02:04.0, e.g.,
> > > > >
> > > > > # RT=/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.2/0000:01:00.0/0000:02:04.0
> > > > > # echo 1 > $RT/0000:04:00.0/remove
> > > > > # echo 1 > $RT/0000:04:00.1/remove
> > > > > # echo 1 > $RT/0000:04:00.2/remove
> > > > > # echo 1 > $RT/0000:04:00.4/remove
> > > > > # echo 1 > $RT/0000:04:00.7/remove
> > > > > # setpci -s02:04.0 CAP_EXP+0x10.w=0x0010
> > > > >
> > > > > That should take 04:00.x out of the picture.
> > > >
> > > > Didn't actually change the behaviour, I'm suspecting an errata for AMD pcie...
> > > >
> > > > So did this, with unpatched kernel:
> > > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 4.56 MBytes 38.2 Mbits/sec 0 67.9 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 4.47 MBytes 37.5 Mbits/sec 0 96.2 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 4.85 MBytes 40.7 Mbits/sec 0 50.9 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 70.7 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 48.1 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 45.2 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 36.8 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 3.98 MBytes 33.4 Mbits/sec 0 36.8 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 36.8 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 4.23 MBytes 35.4 Mbits/sec 0 48.1 KBytes
> > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 43.2 MBytes 36.2 Mbits/sec 0 sender
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 42.7 MBytes 35.8 Mbits/sec receiver
> > > >
> > > > and:
> > > > echo 0 > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:01.2/0000:01:00.0/link/l1_aspm
> > >
> > > BTW, thanks a lot for testing out the "l1_aspm" sysfs file. I'm very
> > > pleased that it seems to be working as intended.
> >
> > It was nice to find it for easy disabling :)
> >
> > > > and:
> > > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 113 MBytes 951 Mbits/sec 153 772 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 109 MBytes 912 Mbits/sec 276 550 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 111 MBytes 933 Mbits/sec 123 625 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 111 MBytes 933 Mbits/sec 31 687 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 0 679 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 136 577 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 214 645 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 32 628 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 81 537 KBytes
> > > > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 110 MBytes 923 Mbits/sec 10 577 KBytes
> > > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> > > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.08 GBytes 927 Mbits/sec 1056 sender
> > > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 1.07 GBytes 923 Mbits/sec receiver
> > > >
> > > > But this only confirms that the fix i experience is a side effect.
> > > >
> > > > The original code is still wrong :)
> > >
> > > What exactly is this machine? Brand, model, config? Maybe you could
> > > add this and a dmesg log to the buzilla? It seems like other people
> > > should be seeing the same problem, so I'm hoping to grub around on the
> > > web to see if there are similar reports involving these devices.
> >
> > ASUS Pro WS X570-ACE with AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
>
> Possible similar issues:
>
> https://forums.unraid.net/topic/94274-hardware-upgrade-woes/
> https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/upgraded-my-home-server-from-intel-to-amd-virtual-disk-stuck-in-degraded-unhealty-state.25535/ (Windows)
Could be, I suspect that we need a workaround (is there a quirk for
"reporting wrong latency"?) and the patches.
> > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=209725
> > >
> > > Here's one that is superficially similar:
> > > https://linux-hardware.org/index.php?probe=e5f24075e5&log=lspci_all
> > > in that it has a RP -- switch -- I211 path. Interestingly, the switch
> > > here advertises <64us L1 exit latency instead of the <32us latency
> > > your switch advertises. Of course, I can't tell if it's exactly the
> > > same switch.
> >
> > Same chipset it seems
> >
> > I'm running bios version:
> > Version: 2206
> > Release Date: 08/13/2020
> >
> > ANd latest is:
> > Version 3003
> > 2020/12/07
> >
> > Will test upgrading that as well, but it could be that they report the
> > incorrect latency of the switch - I don't know how many things AGESA
> > changes but... It's been updated twice since my upgrade.
>
> I wouldn't be surprised if the advertised exit latencies are writable
> by the BIOS because it probably depends on electrical characteristics
> outside the switch. If so, it's possible ASUS just screwed it up.
Not surprisingly, nothing changed.
(There was a lot of "stability improvements")
Powered by blists - more mailing lists