Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <5bdbf3cc3335e1de1f7c13dc79a6d48b65b9d81a.camel@mniewoehner.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tpm, tpm_tis: Handle interrupt storm
From:   Michael =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Niew=F6hner?= <linux@mniewoehner.de>
To:     Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        =?ISO-8859-1?Q?P=E9ter?= Ujfalusi 
        <peter.ujfalusi@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de>, peterhuewe@gmx.de,
        jarkko@kernel.org, jgg@ziepe.ca, jsnitsel@redhat.com,
        hdegoede@redhat.com, oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, l.sanfilippo@kunbus.com,
        p.rosenberger@kunbus.com
In-Reply-To: <20230523151642.GA31298@wunner.de>
References: <20230522143105.8617-1-LinoSanfilippo@gmx.de>
         <c772bcdf-8256-2682-857c-9a6d344606d0@linux.intel.com>
         <20230523074443.GA21236@wunner.de>
         <98f7dc1a-6bed-a66f-650e-10caeb7d0bca@linux.intel.com>
         <20230523151642.GA31298@wunner.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Date:   Mon, 29 May 2023 12:44:28 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.4 
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 2023-05-23 at 17:16 +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > > > > +       dev_err(&chip->dev, HW_ERR
> > > > > +               "TPM interrupt storm detected, polling instead\n");
> > > > 
> > > > Should this be dev_warn or even dev_info level?
> > > 
> > > The corresponding message emitted in tpm_tis_core_init() for
> > > an interrupt that's *never* asserted uses dev_err(), so using
> > > dev_err() here as well serves consistency:
> > > 
> > >         dev_err(&chip->dev, FW_BUG
> > >                 "TPM interrupt not working, polling instead\n");
> > > 
> > > That way the same severity is used both for the never asserted and
> > > the never deasserted interrupt case.
> > 
> > Oh, OK.
> > Is there anything the user can do to have a ERROR less boot?
> 
> You're right that the user can't do anything about it and that
> toning the message down to KERN_WARN or even KERN_NOTICE severity
> may be appropriate.
> 
> However the above-quoted message for the never asserted interrupt
> in tpm_tis_core_init() should then likewise be toned down to the
> same severity.
> 
> I'm wondering why that message uses FW_BUG.  That doesn't make any
> sense to me.  It's typically not a firmware bug, but a hardware issue,
> e.g. an interrupt pin may erroneously not be connected or may be
> connected to ground.  Lino used HW_ERR, which seems more appropriate
> to me.

Firmware is responsible for configuring gpios and interrupts correctly,
independently of it being a design decision or a mistake. AIUI any interrupt
storm could be prevented by firmware in any case by simply disabling that
interrupt. Thus, FW_BUG is the right thing to use here IMO.