Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263281AbTFXW7w (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:59:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263493AbTFXW7v (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:59:51 -0400 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:55989 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263281AbTFXW7G (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2003 18:59:06 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:10:03 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: lkml Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl, akpm@digeo.com Subject: [PATCH] unexpected IO-APIC update Message-Id: <20030624161003.20fbbbd4.rddunlap@osdl.org> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) X-Face: +5V?h'hZQPB9kW Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4491 Lines: 127 Hi, Recently there has been a rash of Unexpected IO APIC reports on the linux-smp mailing list. Most of the most recent ones are due to some newer Intel chipsets (865, 875). The IO APIC Version register doesn't indicate the differences in these IO APICs. I have an patch that addresses these chipsets. It has been tested by a few people with good results and has been blessed by Maciej Rozycki. Other than conditionally decoding IO APIC registers 2 and 3, we could alternately ignore them since Linux doesn't use the values for anything other than printing them. This patch ignores IO APIC register 2 if it's the same value as IO APIC register 1. It also reads IO APIC register 3 if the IO APIC version is >= 0x20, but some chipsets don't support this register, so it is also ignored if its value if the same as IO APIC register 1 or 2. Another possible(?) alternative is to read the PID/VID of the device to determine which registers it supports. However, PCI devices have not been scanned at this point in init, so it would require scanning PCI config space directly and I don't yet see the point of doing that. Oh, and the UNEXPECTED_IO_APIC() function doesn't print anything in 2.5.current and I didn't change that. Patch for 2.5.73 is below. Please apply. -- ~Randy ~ http://developer.osdl.org/rddunlap/ ~ http://www.xenotime.net/linux/ ~ patch_name: ioapic_update_2573.patch patch_version: 2003-06-24.15:43:44 author: Randy.Dunlap description: support newer Intel chipset IO APICs; product: Linux product_versions: linux-2573 maintainer: Maciej W. Rozycki diffstat: = arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++- include/asm-i386/io_apic.h | 5 +++++ 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff -Naur ./include/asm-i386/io_apic.h~ioap ./include/asm-i386/io_apic.h --- ./include/asm-i386/io_apic.h~ioap 2003-06-14 12:18:25.000000000 -0700 +++ ./include/asm-i386/io_apic.h 2003-06-14 20:17:44.000000000 -0700 @@ -44,6 +44,11 @@ __reserved_1 : 4; } __attribute__ ((packed)); +struct IO_APIC_reg_03 { + __u32 boot_DT : 1, + __reserved_1 : 31; +} __attribute__ ((packed)); + /* * # of IO-APICs and # of IRQ routing registers */ diff -Naur ./arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c~ioap ./arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c --- ./arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c~ioap 2003-06-14 12:18:06.000000000 -0700 +++ ./arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c 2003-06-14 20:43:19.000000000 -0700 @@ -1275,6 +1278,7 @@ struct IO_APIC_reg_00 reg_00; struct IO_APIC_reg_01 reg_01; struct IO_APIC_reg_02 reg_02; + struct IO_APIC_reg_03 reg_03; unsigned long flags; printk(KERN_DEBUG "number of MP IRQ sources: %d.\n", mp_irq_entries); @@ -1295,6 +1299,8 @@ *(int *)®_01 = io_apic_read(apic, 1); if (reg_01.version >= 0x10) *(int *)®_02 = io_apic_read(apic, 2); + if (reg_01.version >= 0x20) + *(int *)®_03 = io_apic_read(apic, 3); spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ioapic_lock, flags); printk("\n"); @@ -1332,13 +1336,31 @@ if (reg_01.__reserved_1 || reg_01.__reserved_2) UNEXPECTED_IO_APIC(); - if (reg_01.version >= 0x10) { + /* + * Some Intel chipsets with IO APIC VERSION of 0x1? don't have reg_02, + * but the value of reg_02 is read as the previous read register + * value, so ignore it if reg_02 == reg_01. + */ + if (reg_01.version >= 0x10 && *(int *)®_02 != *(int *)®_01) { printk(KERN_DEBUG ".... register #02: %08X\n", *(int *)®_02); printk(KERN_DEBUG "....... : arbitration: %02X\n", reg_02.arbitration); if (reg_02.__reserved_1 || reg_02.__reserved_2) UNEXPECTED_IO_APIC(); } + /* + * Some Intel chipsets with IO APIC VERSION of 0x2? don't have reg_02 + * or reg_03, but the value of reg_0[23] is read as the previous read + * register value, so ignore it if reg_03 == reg_0[12]. + */ + if (reg_01.version >= 0x20 && *(int *)®_03 != *(int *)®_02 && + *(int *)®_03 != *(int *)®_01) { + printk(KERN_DEBUG ".... register #03: %08X\n", *(int *)®_03); + printk(KERN_DEBUG "....... : Boot DT : %X\n", reg_03.boot_DT); + if (reg_03.__reserved_1) + UNEXPECTED_IO_APIC(); + } + printk(KERN_DEBUG ".... IRQ redirection table:\n"); printk(KERN_DEBUG " NR Log Phy Mask Trig IRR Pol" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/