On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 04:34:01PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 2/11/21 2:09 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi Jerry, > > > > It looks like there still is an issue with the recent changes to the tpm_tis IRQ > > handling. At least I think those are the cause I did not dive any deeper, > > I just noticed that we (Fedora) have been receiving an aweful lot of > > kernel tpm_tis_send_data backtraces with most starting with tpm_tis_probe_irq_... > > > > See for example: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1912167 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1927610 > > > > Those are just the 3 which landed in my inbox today, for much more see: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=tpm_tis_send_data > > (this shows 18 bugs atm). > > > > These were reported through the Fedora ABRT tools which automatically > > collects backtraces, the bugs have links to the ABRT reports, e.g. : > > https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/reports/28155/ > > https://retrace.fedoraproject.org/faf/reports/37107/ > > > > The 28155 report says that so far there have been 308,412 (ouch) automatic > > uploads of that particular variant of these backtraces > > > > Note the second (37107) retrace report is about this happening > > on resume, rather then on probe/tpm_tis_probe_irq_... time. > > > > Did your work on this work land in 5.10 ? Or could it be that the > > issue is an incomplete backport to the 5.10.y stable series ? > > Ping ? > > It is raining bug-reports about this: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=tpm_tis_send_data > > Currently lists 25 bugs and that is excluding bugs which have already > been marked as a duplicate. > > Can someone involved in the patch-series which is causing this regression > please take a look at these kernel backtraces ? > > Regards, > > Hans I incorporated two fixes to this issue to my last PR, which were taken to the mainline. What is the situation with the mainline? /Jarkko
