| Message ID | 1435141065-28536-1-git-send-email-jiang.liu@linux.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable |
| Headers | show |
* Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote: > A regression report from Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>: > There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID 1565:230e) > network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded, the IRQs in > the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with considerable > latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible. The machine responded > to the power button but didn't actually power down. It just stuck at the > powering down message. I had to press the power button for 4 seconds to power > it down. > > The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this, > either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting, the > network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM announced > itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat some sense back > to the computer. > > The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was > good. So please put this into quotes, like: =============== Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression: "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID 1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded, the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible. The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the power button for 4 seconds to power it down. The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this, either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting, the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat some sense back to the computer. The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was good." ... =============== Also note the indentation, that helps readability. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
2015-06-24 12:18 keltezéssel, Ingo Molnar írta: > * Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote: > >> A regression report from Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>: >> There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID 1565:230e) >> network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded, the IRQs in >> the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with considerable >> latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible. The machine responded >> to the power button but didn't actually power down. It just stuck at the >> powering down message. I had to press the power button for 4 seconds to power >> it down. >> >> The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this, >> either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting, the >> network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM announced >> itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat some sense back >> to the computer. >> >> The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was >> good. > So please put this into quotes, like: > > =============== > Zoltan Boszormenyi reported this regression: > > "There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID 1565:230e) > network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded, the IRQs in > the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with considerable > latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible. The machine responded > to the power button but didn't actually power down. It just stuck at the > powering down message. I had to press the power button for 4 seconds to power > it down. > > The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this, > either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting, the > network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM announced > itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat some sense back > to the computer. > > The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was > good." > > ... > =============== > > Also note the indentation, that helps readability. > > Thanks, > > Ingo So, will there be a v4 with a commit message satisfactory to Ingo that will be part of 4.0.7/4.1.1 and 4.2? Best regards, Zoltán -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2015/6/29 16:55, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: > 2015-06-24 12:18 keltezéssel, Ingo Molnar írta: >> * Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> Also note the indentation, that helps readability. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ingo > > So, will there be a v4 with a commit message satisfactory to Ingo > that will be part of 4.0.7/4.1.1 and 4.2? Hi Zoltan, I'm waiting for a few days to see if there will be other comments, and will send out v4 then. Thanks! Gerry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/resource.c b/drivers/acpi/resource.c index 8244f013f210..f1c966e05078 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/resource.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/resource.c @@ -193,6 +193,7 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win, u8 iodec = attr->granularity == 0xfff ? ACPI_DECODE_10 : ACPI_DECODE_16; bool wp = addr->info.mem.write_protect; u64 len = attr->address_length; + u64 start, end, offset = 0; struct resource *res = &win->res; /* @@ -204,9 +205,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win, pr_debug("ACPI: Invalid address space min_addr_fix %d, max_addr_fix %d, len %llx\n", addr->min_address_fixed, addr->max_address_fixed, len); - res->start = attr->minimum; - res->end = attr->maximum; - /* * For bridges that translate addresses across the bridge, * translation_offset is the offset that must be added to the @@ -214,12 +212,22 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win, * primary side. Non-bridge devices must list 0 for all Address * Translation offset bits. */ - if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) { - res->start += attr->translation_offset; - res->end += attr->translation_offset; - } else if (attr->translation_offset) { + if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) + offset = attr->translation_offset; + else if (attr->translation_offset) pr_debug("ACPI: translation_offset(%lld) is invalid for non-bridge device.\n", attr->translation_offset); + start = attr->minimum + offset; + end = attr->maximum + offset; + + win->offset = offset; + res->start = start; + res->end = end; + if (sizeof(resource_size_t) < sizeof(u64) && + (offset != win->offset || start != res->start || end != res->end)) { + pr_warn("acpi resource window ([%#llx-%#llx] ignored, not CPU addressable)\n", + attr->minimum, attr->maximum); + return false; } switch (addr->resource_type) { @@ -236,8 +244,6 @@ static bool acpi_decode_space(struct resource_win *win, return false; } - win->offset = attr->translation_offset; - if (addr->producer_consumer == ACPI_PRODUCER) res->flags |= IORESOURCE_WINDOW;
A regression report from Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu>: There's a Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 (PCI ID 10ec:8168, Subsystem ID 1565:230e) network chip on the mainboard. After the r8169 driver loaded, the IRQs in the machine went berserk. Keyboard keypressed arrived with considerable latency and duplicated, so no real work was possible. The machine responded to the power button but didn't actually power down. It just stuck at the powering down message. I had to press the power button for 4 seconds to power it down. The computer is a POS machine with a big battery inside. Because of this, either ACPI or the Realtek chip kept the bad state and after rebooting, the network chip didn't even show up in lspci. Not even the PXE ROM announced itself during boot. I had to disconnect the battery to beat some sense back to the computer. The regression happens with 4.0.5, 4.1.0-rc8 and 4.1.0-final. 3.18.16 was good. The regression is caused by commit 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation"). Since commit 593669c2ac0f, x86 PCI ACPI host bridge driver validates ACPI resources by first converting an ACPI resource to a 'struct resource' structure and then applying checks against the converted resource structure. The 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource' are defined to be type of resource_size_t, which may be 32 bits or 64 bits depending on CONFIG_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT. This may cause incorrect resource validation results with 32-bit kernels because 64-bit ACPI resource descriptors may get truncated when converting to 32-bit 'start' and 'end' fields in 'struct resource'. It eventually affects PCI resource allocation subsystem and makes some PCI devices and the system behave abnormally due to incorrect resource assignment. So enhance the ACPI resource parsing interfaces to ignore ACPI resource descriptors with address/offset above 4G when running in 32-bit mode. With the fix applied, the behavior of the machine was restored to how 3.18.16 worked, i.e. the memory range that is over 4GB is ignored again, and lspci -vvxxx shows that everything is at the same memory window as they were with 3.18.16. Reported-by: Boszormenyi Zoltan <zboszor@pr.hu> Fixes: 593669c2ac0f ("x86/PCI/ACPI: Use common ACPI resource interfaces to simplify implementation") Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.0 --- Thanks, Ingo and Zoltan! Will write bugfix commit messages for people who will backport them. Thanks! Gerry --- drivers/acpi/resource.c | 24 +++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)