Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a6:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m35-v6csp2322196imm; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:10:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdahPiSyCBQuDwwp8W8JEwRVnb4PFkRHPOlCG2yQnPri/3OSpzyz0+doWzegGLJDR60TK4UN X-Received: by 2002:a62:d113:: with SMTP id z19-v6mr42108473pfg.98.1537467056685; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:10:56 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1537467056; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=Hp7v3814TE15zFgZWTmk8QjnAPOrVwsOnwxS5PmoenI9rcrrwKpgtCnl9f4hF/9qox SppkuTFIGsjAhl8CIVXMMysiNC80JgHSL5Mlfvam14pWT0q5zLLibNAA4hGtqf8lw98X Wx2UoLI5OPqOt8KxKlJfn5N7ubnIbmyTWWVZ38+2+ivhWGWbvpxVLtJpq2FdVw3tFFr+ DEc0hmeVB9eVj8NPiVOgZseyFrzxt+VtYFiah2ePJbGRMYmIWW35zTHMb+wFfNMizvg6 jVD9c9KTNGnGuLeVTryXQWi2iuL0B8M9AU4TypPAMxNzLIebbqeRfbxRI9CaexBkiiHg VERQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=C3KnnUW8ADMuPlxEaz3Sx46B96gdCKurfI9VWXJh0Do=; b=tAuIzxuW2lXbn3jS6fBS6ggi03diFpP6vQjd8cRs89Jq/YL/fJkbYJ7JOUtQTwcucl PBsO24h61fDoDvJXlQp/Js9Kew+LO6ubeU8GJ+T2mD4Qye3qavORjG8YzIPIh4ywSGmS sPmBLlOHqyFve4a5HY1DW0uqOtC2IqhQPdVfLyDQ4B71MpQM2GzxIbI6uRkUQyMgePBl /Rc7DFw17bbHJQRlvzxiBMW6owZoeGw9tBZ/OFKQQSokmvSZleXKqxQKzUVneerS2e21 KDkK1FooRwpKnYHtuy6ECNDwF9/mUxH3xI4d1RmU92WmXKY80kfADcG0dGcJXuZKdJgU zZYw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=a2oUfWiB; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w126-v6si27897332pfb.232.2018.09.20.11.10.37; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:10:56 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=a2oUfWiB; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388086AbeITXx0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 19:53:26 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f193.google.com ([209.85.215.193]:35884 "EHLO mail-pg1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728444AbeITXx0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 19:53:26 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f193.google.com with SMTP id d1-v6so4803682pgo.3 for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:08:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C3KnnUW8ADMuPlxEaz3Sx46B96gdCKurfI9VWXJh0Do=; b=a2oUfWiBFTfqF+Oys8MlL4f3YlKsc2d7bH7IUEs347pXfteSbAtIPdqZzUZIJXyVjD HMD3EczQI9fgbnplOmMNbRh+D4vJMBNwG5WsmEKEjsjCCG7q4Mz04nJgTFsfbFbZaxKb 6Lsf4HzRPtKTYKpHMu3dfwjxXJy3t/DZ5jMM68kVveeoklYhNoF6kwc8C5DUBhMjcVCn fPt9TCq7TNsCDG+Mq0HYVcMPLpbOl5TNtCBC1WubXeutHgVyDyX/dCpqI07vi/blQNls phluCUC7HjGwj1F1JqduiL2/gKB5BlttWi8I77Fq908Cak8LUgi0DQvUPxiqxcICd/SW 7gHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C3KnnUW8ADMuPlxEaz3Sx46B96gdCKurfI9VWXJh0Do=; b=KcY8syvy0CWf2ERRVB67f7Q/tdSjtsWhck+IldDheoeyBcgkyuiDJ5rVzBD8RPSrgn UJe1ALkNo+fQn6gqYRnMp2smmVcNiyRn9mTIfDAonZAk7+Yh7BN/YdixnhfuX6jimJgV ERUGH+8cdgLFJ6avyHRTaPeWFoGdHgYnGRR4ASY3mUS40rbwcZsfN+C7ZpE7lGFPkpmy vXzXJyUCqZfBTq+NwS41Ym1QpuTAjohCZ5F/lhJXV944vgC0fgN49drNp0lNqLKbZ1CU cxU+xSqx0L0ouzZ7wY+niJn963XbGEnbOBJOQ6XhL5wV55Jm5dtleC9qsez53flnIHpa a+pA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51BrD5Y09Qj2pQAYK94CXTbVo645PMEKvTofw7kXfuHWxwVOusXO uD4beZgZ2nVyDbwvW/V/vmvE57o129VbUAI6h5h4IA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:6c04:: with SMTP id h4-v6mr25279854pgc.290.1537466923106; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:08:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180911225630.124502-1-venture@google.com> <585d1c3a-6121-c20d-f6d6-7567595cd1af@acm.org> <966e9741-6a27-a511-8d39-6576d8cfc8f8@gmail.com> <25f12226-b974-9373-cb9b-b04f2a6dfcdf@acm.org> In-Reply-To: <25f12226-b974-9373-cb9b-b04f2a6dfcdf@acm.org> From: Patrick Venture Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 11:08:31 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ipmi: looped device detection To: Corey Minyard Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Greg KH , openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, Linux Kernel Mailing List , OpenBMC Maillist Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:20 PM Corey Minyard wrote: > > On 09/19/2018 02:56 PM, Patrick Venture wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 2:37 PM Corey Minyard wrote: > >> On 09/18/2018 01:42 PM, Patrick Venture wrote: > >>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:54 PM Patrick Venture wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 3:10 PM Corey Minyard wrote: > >>>>> On 09/11/2018 05:56 PM, Patrick Venture wrote: > >>>>>> Try to get the device ID repeatedly during initialization before giving up. > >>>>>> The BMC isn't always responsive, and this allows it to be slightly flaky > >>>>>> during early boot. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Tested: Installed on a system with the BMC software disabled > >>>>>> such that it was non-responsive. The driver correctly detected this > >>>>>> and gave up as expected. Then I re-enabled the BMC software unloaded > >>>>>> and reloaded the driver and it was detected properly. > >>>>> The patch looks fine, but I wonder if this is something that is really > >>>>> valuable. > >>>>> I have wondered about this before. > >>>>> > >>>>> The question is: If the BMC is unavailable, what are the chances of it > >>>>> becoming > >>>>> available by the time you do 5 attempts? I would guess that is a pretty > >>>>> small > >>>>> chance, which is why I haven't done this already. > >>> Friendly ping. I'd like to get a sense of whether you're likely to > >>> accept this. If not, it's fine, will close out patch in current > >>> downstream rebase. > >> I'm ok with doing this, but I lied about the patch being fine, there are > >> some issue. > >> Well, I didn't lie, but I didn't look closely enough. > >> > >> Can you use dev_xxx() instead of pr_xxx(). I know the driver isn't > >> currently > >> consistent, but there are a number of patches I have pending to make it > >> better and it's a longer-term goal. > > Ack. > > > >> Can you make GET_DEVICE_ID_ATTEMPTS more specific, add IPMI_SI_ to > >> the beginning or something. > > Ack. > > > >> I am not sure that I'm ok with waiting up to 1.25 seconds in the init > >> function. > >> As I mentioned before, a large number of systems have broken ACPI/SMBIOS > >> information, and for those it will add 1.25 seconds to the boot time of > >> every > >> one of those systems. That won't make me a popular guy :-). > > Yeah, that's problematic for the systems that'll never get a valid > > response. I don't think it makes sense to gate the feature with a > > configuration option, do you? > > Yeah, a config option wouldn't really help. You could do a module parm, > but that's > really not very easy to use. > > Pushing the detection off to a thread would solve that problem, but it > creates its > own problems. The driver may be in the process of detecting something, but > it may not be ready when the module load or kernel boot finishes. > > I don't think this has been an issue in the past because generally the > BMC is > integral to the boot of most systems. So it's always operational by the > time > the OS comes up. > > So I'm not sure what to do. Let's drop the patch. I'll maintain it downstream. Thanks for your thoughts and time on this. > > -corey > > >> This is a harder problem to figure out what to do. To solve it properly > >> would > >> mean having a timer or thread drive this, and unload the module later if > >> the process fails. > >> > >> -corey > >> > >>> Thanks > >>> > >>>> This patch was actually critical for us to provide a reliable IPMI > >>>> interface. The version of OpenBMC or the state of the BMC at the > >>>> point the kernel was loading was flaky, so following the example in > >>>> the BIOS source, we just re-try a few times. We also can hold boot X > >>>> seconds until it's responding, but, this avoided some issues inherent > >>>> with that. > >>>> > >>>>> You could have something that re-tested periodically, but there are so many > >>>>> systems with IPMI specified in ACPI or SMBIOS that is wrong, and it would > >>>>> try forever. Also not really a good thing. > >>>> If we did a periodic check, it could check X times, but I felt going > >>>> for a simple solution was ideal -- and this idea was proved out on a > >>>> few platforms. We have other drivers that are loaded by the kernel > >>>> (not at run-time) and they depend on IPMI, and without this patch they > >>>> would then have a non-trivial probability of failure. > >>>> > >>>>> So I've left it to reload the driver or use the hotmod interface. > >>>>> > >>>>> -corey > >>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Venture > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> v2: > >>>>>> - removed extra variable that was set but not used. > >>>>>> --- > >>>>>> drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++- > >>>>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c > >>>>>> index 90ec010bffbd..5fed96897fe8 100644 > >>>>>> --- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c > >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_si_intf.c > >>>>>> @@ -1918,11 +1918,13 @@ int ipmi_si_add_smi(struct si_sm_io *io) > >>>>>> * held, primarily to keep smi_num consistent, we only one to do these > >>>>>> * one at a time. > >>>>>> */ > >>>>>> +#define GET_DEVICE_ID_ATTEMPTS 5 > >>>>>> static int try_smi_init(struct smi_info *new_smi) > >>>>>> { > >>>>>> int rv = 0; > >>>>>> int i; > >>>>>> char *init_name = NULL; > >>>>>> + unsigned long sleep_rm; > >>>>>> > >>>>>> pr_info(PFX "Trying %s-specified %s state machine at %s address 0x%lx, slave address 0x%x, irq %d\n", > >>>>>> ipmi_addr_src_to_str(new_smi->io.addr_source), > >>>>>> @@ -2003,7 +2005,26 @@ static int try_smi_init(struct smi_info *new_smi) > >>>>>> * Attempt a get device id command. If it fails, we probably > >>>>>> * don't have a BMC here. > >>>>>> */ > >>>>>> - rv = try_get_dev_id(new_smi); > >>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < GET_DEVICE_ID_ATTEMPTS; i++) { > >>>>>> + pr_info(PFX "Attempting to read BMC device ID\n"); > >>>>>> + rv = try_get_dev_id(new_smi); > >>>>>> + /* If it succeeded, stop trying */ > >>>>>> + if (!rv) > >>>>>> + break; > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> + /* Sleep for ~0.25s before trying again instead of hammering > >>>>>> + * the BMC. > >>>>>> + */ > >>>>>> + sleep_rm = msleep_interruptible(250); > >>>>>> + if (sleep_rm != 0) { > >>>>>> + pr_info(PFX "Find BMC interrupted\n"); > >>>>>> + rv = -EINTR; > >>>>>> + goto out_err; > >>>>>> + } > >>>>>> + } > >>>>>> + > >>>>>> + /* If we exited the loop above and rv is non-zero we ran out of tries. > >>>>>> + */ > >>>>>> if (rv) { > >>>>>> if (new_smi->io.addr_source) > >>>>>> dev_err(new_smi->io.dev, > >