From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 71FFA1C2457 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 13:25:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728566749; cv=none; b=WiRxgjkJNnk1M6NJzOx97VOMU1CegMODrTsNccFNnvBgarr0pZPLFagPYR1KLk7h2N4gEhKBmaNgKP3bzItEB4jkfVOtMuMYpHLDON1RNJ0nxy1aA7K74G210Gv9OnEiJWweXBFD6m5WM7Z+BP2KrI7z637JNvfCewA4AMQAOR4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728566749; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SSm8FMcKQN9aEzadseoH+Ari2ZrNiHPVUKInNqS7OeM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=hw8Vv3cd2/LO/4vxjECRLu+Sxi7GXxUhp75XuNvwQ4pjnmyXW9qiav19YOTWPcaeMglIlcmXYcK7i94DFwZx//X05z6s8H70PcHSGYUzgxZa6/AcZjr7Izbsh7LLJ6OVbGazPrnNfF5pwD15OzYtmMvSC1MKNrgntoDTdAykvw8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=aoPxQ75l; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="aoPxQ75l" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1728566748; x=1760102748; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SSm8FMcKQN9aEzadseoH+Ari2ZrNiHPVUKInNqS7OeM=; b=aoPxQ75lnU0i/Mg2gp9z5geJE0RGC+AjPT6fPu8vH9F2ypWoHsbBlJJp OLwzIjbcIyLFmkBBByPMIPeHuAinngD6QDG74DpPYPAsQfSw/jYN0hkNE BuqVEEF+/e0HFbvoVuk8SbmS8CYznfpaqGtIb2shvbKbuJQUS2XwS+YWs bSIInJdtWdDKO9TwrMHVCnptsZ9A7yPsfw1Q7X9iUtLEqU7uwF0lV62XA KLfun8ec3MDSlpbVbtuAcLj/uYFfk1qU2hhclzvTRFUZnXxl4SOQ83bP6 5T7MqMhD9GU6OaKjdkhygv/H01FNjLRRuDo+I9ehxN3niqAbX/DkymXAs Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: zMH7QMUEQkiBHwT69HCqaQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +kclub+ARY+Cg/pW1KoYFQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11220"; a="27867062" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,193,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="27867062" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2024 06:25:48 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: xsKVl7RoRCi03bsjZbAKTg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: rB2RbH7ORnir0dGQr4PYig== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,193,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="76499389" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by orviesa010.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2024 06:25:48 -0700 Received: from [10.212.25.197] (kliang2-mobl1.ccr.corp.intel.com [10.212.25.197]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F34C020B5782; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 06:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <635be050-f0ab-4242-ac79-db67d561dae9@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 09:25:45 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [regression]Boot Hang on Kernel 6.1.83+ with Dell PowerEdge R770 and Intel Xeon 6710E To: Jinpu Wang , Greg KH Cc: stable , baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, jroedel@suse.de, Sasha Levin , x86@kernel.org References: <2024101006-scanner-unboxed-0190@gregkh> <2024101000-duplex-justify-97e6@gregkh> Content-Language: en-US From: "Liang, Kan" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2024-10-10 6:10 a.m., Jinpu Wang wrote: > Hi Greg, > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 11:31 AM Greg KH wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 11:13:42AM +0200, Jinpu Wang wrote: >>> Hi Greg, >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 11:07 AM Greg KH wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 09:31:37AM +0200, Jinpu Wang wrote: >>>>> Hello all, >>>>> >>>>> We are experiencing a boot hang issue when booting kernel version >>>>> 6.1.83+ on a Dell Inc. PowerEdge R770 equipped with an Intel Xeon >>>>> 6710E processor. After extensive testing and use of `git bisect`, we >>>>> have traced the issue to commit: >>>>> >>>>> `586e19c88a0c ("iommu/vt-d: Retrieve IOMMU perfmon capability information")` >>>>> >>>>> This commit appears to be part of a larger patchset, which can be found here: >>>>> [Patchset on lore.kernel.org](https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/7c4b3e4e-1c5d-04f1-1891-84f686c94736@linux.intel.com/T/) >>>>> >>>>> We attempted to boot with the `intel_iommu=off` option, but the system >>>>> hangs in the same manner. However, the system boots successfully after >>>>> disabling `CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_PERF_EVENTS`. >>>> >>>> Is there any error messages? Does the latest 6.6.y tree work properly? >>>> If so, why not just use that, no new hardware should be using older >>>> kernel trees anyway :) >>> No error, just hang, I've removed "quiet" and added "debug". >>> Yes, the latest 6.6.y tree works for this, but there are other >>> problems/dependency we have to solve. >> >> Ok, that implies that we need to add some other patch to 6.1.y, OR we >> can revert it from 6.1.y. Let me know what you think is the better >> thing to do. >> > I think better to revert both: > 8c91a4bfc7f8 ("iommu: Fix compilation without CONFIG_IOMMU_INTEL") I'm not sure about this one. May need baolu's comments. > 586e19c88a0c ("iommu/vt-d: Retrieve IOMMU perfmon capability information") > 7 patches are required to enable the IOMMU perfmon. https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230128200428.1459118-1-kan.liang@linux.intel.com/ But it looks like only the above 1 patch is back ported to the 6.1.y. Unless we can back port the rest of 6 patches, I think it should be ok to revert it for 6.1.y. Thanks, Kan > unless other guys have a different opinon. >> thanks, >> >> greg k-h > Thanks!