From: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
Cc: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [Bug report] Warning when hot-add an ACPI0004 device.
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 10:33:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52439CFE.4030501@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1380147885.14046.40.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Hi Toshi,
On 09/26/2013 06:24 AM, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-09-25 at 10:31 +0000, Gu Zheng wrote:
>> Hi Toshi,
>>
>> On 09/12/2013 11:11 PM, Toshi Kani wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 13:00 +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
>>>> Hi Rafael, Toshi,
>>>>
>>>> When we hot-add an ACPI0004 device, we got the following warning:
>>>>
>>>> acpi ACPI0004:01: Attempt to re-insert
>>>>
>>>> The ACPI0004 device is a System Board in Fujitsu server, which has two
>>>> numa nodes (processors and memory).
>>>>
>>>> It seems that we reserved the ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK event twice in
>>>> acpi_hotplug_notify_cb().
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to bisect, this happens after the following commit:
>>>>
>>>> From 68a67f6c78b80525d9b3c6672e7782de95e56a83 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>>> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>> Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 23:05:55 +0100
>>>> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ACPI / container: Use common hotplug code
>>>>
>>>> Switch the ACPI container driver to using common device hotplug code
>>>> introduced previously. This reduces the driver down to a trivial
>>>> definition and registration of a struct acpi_scan_handler object.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>>>> Acked-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
>>>> Tested-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/acpi/container.c | 146
>>>> ++++-------------------------------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 136 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm now investigating this problem. If you have any idea about why this
>>>> happens, please let me know.
>>>
>>> With the above change, container devices use the common notify handler,
>>> which logs the warning message in question when it receives device check
>>> twice on a same device. Before the change, the container-specific
>>> notify handler did not log this message in the same case (but considered
>>> it as an eject request).
>>>
>>> So, I suspect that you are getting device check twice regardless of the
>>> kernel change. Can you check KERN_DEBUG messages to see if that is the
>>> case? The notify handler logs all events with KERN_DEBUG.
>>
>> Follow your suggestion, we confirm that it really received ACPI_NOTIFY_
>> DEVICE_CHECK event*twice*, but the original ACPI container driver only
>> received once, does the common device hotplug code introduce another device
>> check? any idea?
>>
>> Container uses common device hotplug code:
>> [ 142.937724] IPv6: ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth8: link becomes ready
>> [ 674.975575] ACPI: \_SB_.LSB1: ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK event <<<<
>
> acpi_hotplug_notify_cb() calls acpi_os_hotplug_execute() to schedule to
> run acpi_scan_device_check() asynchronously and returns immediately.
> This leads acpi_ev_asynch_enable_gpe() to run next, which clears this
> GPE (if level triggered) and re-enable GPE.
Thanks for your explanation, it's really the routine you mentioned above.
>
>> [ 674.991604] ACPI: \_SB_.LSB1: ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK event <<<<
>
> It appears that re-enabling GPE caused this GPE to show up again as a
> spurious interrupt.
Yes, it is.
>
>> [ 675.613990] ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC2] (domain 0000 [bus fd])
>> [ 675.684970] acpi PNP0A03:01: ACPI _OSC support notification failed, disabling PCIe ASPM
>> [ 675.780957] acpi PNP0A03:01: Unable to request _OSC control (_OSC support mask: 0x08)
>> [ 675.874806] ACPI _OSC control for PCIe not granted, disabling ASPM
>> [ 675.949005] pci_bus 0000:fd: Allocating resources
>> [ 675.960145] ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC3] (domain 0000 [bus fc])
>> [ 676.031176] acpi PNP0A03:02: ACPI _OSC support notification failed, disabling PCIe ASPM
>> [ 676.127129] acpi PNP0A03:02: Unable to request _OSC control (_OSC support mask: 0x08)
>> [ 676.220943] ACPI _OSC control for PCIe not granted, disabling ASPM
>> [ 676.295019] pci_bus 0000:fc: Allocating resources
>>
>> Original ACPI container driver:
>> [ 1526.122933] Container driver received ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK event <<<<
>
> In the original code, container_notify_cb() proceeds the device check
> handling and then calls _OST on the same thread. It then re-enable GPE.
According to our debug, the whole routine was executed on the same thread.
> This ordering seems to avoid the spurious interrupt on your platform.
It seems that, but it is very strange.
>
>> [ 1526.800646] ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC2] (domain 0000 [bus fd])
>> [ 1526.871682] acpi PNP0A03:01: ACPI _OSC support notification failed, disabling PCIe ASPM
>> [ 1526.967878] acpi PNP0A03:01: Unable to request _OSC control (_OSC support mask: 0x08)
>> [ 1527.061891] ACPI _OSC control for PCIe not granted, disabling ASPM
>> [ 1527.136036] pci_bus 0000:fd: Allocating resources
>> [ 1527.150747] ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [UNC3] (domain 0000 [bus fc])
>> [ 1527.221821] acpi PNP0A03:02: ACPI _OSC support notification failed, disabling PCIe ASPM
>> [ 1527.317738] acpi PNP0A03:02: Unable to request _OSC control (_OSC support mask: 0x08)
>> [ 1527.411795] ACPI _OSC control for PCIe not granted, disabling ASPM
>> [ 1527.485917] pci_bus 0000:fc: Allocating resources
>
> The GPE handler code in ACPICA is the same. So, the issue could be due
> to either;
> - The firmware expects _OST before re-enabling GPE, or
> - The timing of re-enabling GPE was too soon on your platform.
Thanks for your directions.
>
> Can you check with your firmware team to see if this might be the case?
I'll confirm this.
Best regards,
Gu
>
> Thanks,
> -Toshi
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-26 2:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-12 5:00 [Bug report] Warning when hot-add an ACPI0004 device Tang Chen
2013-09-12 15:11 ` Toshi Kani
2013-09-25 10:31 ` Gu Zheng
2013-09-25 14:36 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-26 2:33 ` Gu Zheng
2013-09-25 22:24 ` Toshi Kani
2013-09-26 2:33 ` Gu Zheng [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52439CFE.4030501@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=toshi.kani@hp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox