From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30111C4361B for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 20:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF79E224B0 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 20:41:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2503462AbgLNUl6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 15:41:58 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46952 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2503456AbgLNUl5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Dec 2020 15:41:57 -0500 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:12e:550::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98F88C0613D3 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 2020 12:41:16 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1607978475; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qS4qcXxU+s6fWyXG9bhT3LCWQ3xJUKBwKmfnPv0f8e0=; b=aAUs1vIZtJFAElWdVUA3tsB5j0spD9WB5JudPfs2RhLs9KY73m5wGivKRp+emDmtTwszzw AroOm5SFJDHCa2/c8xNM089MBqO70a0l2CAjGO8LlEzjTdAHGcqNL8I8nNNZ/yMhN+jRc/ 55dgocRTidD2m6IuEEs2FYvnNZFdDYoSf+yBl/GutlBWqosyAGosT1cXrgYMlhO/lc6lol VRLvNjChuwgVxEi7Eg9m1c4/eByBP26utQM3aMfPDab+G0W9NY2CL5CpGKU4Jxse51QAEt JfrCRgIIZpInZixcb6ACj3xxEvD4SKhVkDZ5ZuLXjt8ZlrULVUyLaVWMjFwFkA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1607978475; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qS4qcXxU+s6fWyXG9bhT3LCWQ3xJUKBwKmfnPv0f8e0=; b=y1axIo43d0o2ZM/Gv1XtbPmEifu2hjgDU9AlSfl/V3hDPxUb+XeRNByRJrsjL3x9LLCTmP JCxq+AdsgWFkfFBQ== To: Shuah Khan , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: "x86\@kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Shuah Khan Subject: Re: common_interrupt: No irq handler for vector In-Reply-To: <3630fe3f-0dff-e21e-17a8-ed251df81fbc@linuxfoundation.org> References: <9741d93c-3cd1-c4ef-74bb-7f635231c778@linuxfoundation.org> <87im96g6ox.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <3630fe3f-0dff-e21e-17a8-ed251df81fbc@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:41:14 +0100 Message-ID: <87lfe0dst1.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 14 2020 at 09:11, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 12/12/20 12:33 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 11 2020 at 13:41, Shuah Khan wrote: >> >>> I am debugging __common_interrupt: 1.55 No irq handler for vector >>> messages and noticed comments and code don't agree: >> >> I bet that's on an AMD system with broken AGESA BIOS.... Good luck >> debugging it :) BIOS updates are on the way so I'm told. >> > Interesting. The behavior I am seeing doesn't seem to be consistent > with BIOS problem. I don't see these messages on 5.10-rc7. I started > seeing them on stable releases. It started right around 5.9.9 and > not present on 5.9.7. What kind of machine? > I am bisecting to isolate. Same issue on all stables 5.4, 4.19 and > so on. If it is BIOS problem I would expect to see it on 5.10-rc7 > and wouldn't have expected to start seeing it 5.9.9. Can you provide some more details, e.g. dmesg please? >> No. It's perfectly correct in the MSI code. See further down. >> >> if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(this_cpu_read(vector_irq[cfg->vector]))) >> this_cpu_write(vector_irq[cfg->vector], VECTOR_RETRIGGERED); >> > > I am asking about inconsistent comments and the actual message as the > comment implies if vector is VECTOR_UNUSED state, this message won't > be triggered in common_interrupt. Based on that my read is the comment > might be wrong if the code is correct as you are saying. The comment says: >> * anyway. If the vector is unused, then it is marked so it won't >> * trigger the 'No irq handler for vector' warning in >> * common_interrupt(). If the vector is unused, then it is _marked_ so .... It perhaps should explicitely say 'is marked as VECTOR_RETRIGGERED' to make it clear. Thanks, tglx