On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 03:36:55PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 6/30/21 2:47 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 6/30/21 12:05 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 09:14:39PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> On 6/29/21 8:04 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 03:54:59PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> On 6/23/21 3:40 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 02:04:52PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 6/14/21 3:33 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 6/1/21 6:04 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 5/31/21 6:36 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Interestingly enough the first backtrace is also happening on a: > >>>>>>>>>>> "Dell Inc. XPS 13 9310/0MRT12, BIOS 2.2.0 04/06/2021" > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> So it seems that at least with 5.12.6 (which has the last 2 fixes) > >>>>>>>>>>> all reports are about the XPS 13 9310. I wonder if there is an > >>>>>>>>>>> issue with the TPM interrupt line on the XPS 13 9310; I've asked the > >>>>>>>>>>> reporters to try adding tpm_tis.interrupts=0 to their kernel commandline. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> This is helpful for sure that these all are happening on matching hardware. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> So our kernel-backtrace tracking info (ABRT) just recorded a third backtrace > >>>>>>>>> with a kernel >= 5.12.6, again on the XPS 13 9310, so now we have 3 variants: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 1. Backtrace starting with a call to ima_add_boot_aggregate > >>>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1963712 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 2. Backtrace starting with a call to tpm_dev_async_work: > >>>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964974 > >>>>>>>>> (note this one is not easily reproducible) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 3. Backtrace starting with a call to rng_dev_read: > >>>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920510 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 3. is the new one. All bugs linked above are public, all 3 backtraces > >>>>>>>>> so far have only been reported on the XPS 13 9310 (with kernel >= 5.12.6) > >>>>>>>>> and I've asked all the reporters to check if tpm_tis.interrupts=0 helps. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Quick status update, I've got a response from a XPS 13 9310 user in: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920510 > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Indicating that a. he can reproduce this with the latest >= 5.12.6 kernels; > >>>>>>>> and b. it goes away when specifying tpm_tis.interrupts=0 as I expected > >>>>>>>> (I expected this because all the bug-reports started when the interrupt > >>>>>>>> code got fixed/re-enabled a while ago). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> One more status update. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - A new 4th variant of the backtrace has been spotted, where the problem hits > >>>>>>> when called from probe() -> tpm2_auto_startup -> tpm2_do_selftest, see: > >>>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1958381 > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> - So far all reports with kernel >= 5.12.6 have been on a Dell XPS 13 9310 > >>>>>>> models. But the new variant is happening on a Dell XPS 15 9500 and the > >>>>>>> backtrace starting at ima_add_boot_aggregate is also being reported on > >>>>>>> a Dell XPS 15 9500 (as well as on the XPS 13 9310). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Regards, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hans > >>>>>> > >>>>>> OK, I'll have to query if I could borrow that laptop from someone. It's > >>>>>> fairly common laptop, i.e. might be possible. > >>>>> > >>>>> In the mean time I've also got a report that this variant of the backtrace: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Backtrace starting with a call to ima_add_boot_aggregate > >>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1963712 > >>>>> > >>>>> Is also still happening with recent 5.12.y kernels on > >>>>> Dell Precision 7750 laptops. Both the Precision 7750 and the XPS 9500 use > >>>>> 10th gen comet lake processors (i7-10750H), where as the XPS 9310 is using > >>>>> an icelake processor. So the common denominator seems to be that they are > >>>>> all 2020 Dell laptop models using the latest Intel CPUs. > >>>>> > >>>>> FYI the complete list of models on which some of the 4 backtrace variants > >>>>> are still seen on recent 5.12.y kernels is now: > >>>>> > >>>>> Dell XPS 13 9310 > >>>>> Dell XPS 15 9500 > >>>>> Dell Precision 7750 > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> > >>>>> Hans > >>>> > >>>> Does "tpm_tis.interrupts=0" uniformly workaround the issue? > >>> > >>> I unfortunately have not gotten much replies to my request to test with > >>> tpm_tis.interrupts=0, but for those people who have bothered to test > >>> (2 reporters IIRC) using tpm_tis.interrupts=0 does avoid the issue. > >> > >> So we see this in dmesg as first anything from TPM: > >> > >> [ 0.904572] tpm_tis STM0125:00: 2.0 TPM (device-id 0x0, rev-id 78) > >> > >> This means that one command is successfully processed by the TPM, i.e. > >> tpm2_probe() in tpm_tis_core_init(). > >> > >> My first *guess* was that IRQ is given by ACPI, would need ACPI dump to > >> confirm (e.g. sudo acpidump > acpi.dump). It cannot be so because otherwise > >> this code path would be executed: > >> > >> if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ)) { > >> dev_err(&chip->dev, FW_BUG > >> "TPM interrupt not working, polling instead\n"); > >> > >> disable_interrupts(chip); > >> } > >> > >> TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ is never set, so you should see this message in dmesg if > >> a legit value is given to IRQ by ACPI. We are probably planning re-enable > >> IRQ code after these type of issues are fully resolved, but right now you > >> should not end up having it enabled (see tpm_tis_send() function). > >> > >> To put this together "if (irq != -1) {" path in tpm_tis_core_init() is > >> never executed. And early in the same function the interrupt hardware is > >> *explicitly* disabled. > >> > >> For me this looks like a hardware bug right now: interrupts stay enabled > >> for some reason. > >> > >> ACPI dump would be useful to verify some of the assumptions in this. > > > > Ok, I've added a comment to the Fedora bugs for the 4 different backtrace > > variants asking for acpidumps for the Dell XPS 13 9310, Dell XPS 15 9500 > > and Dell Precision 7750 laptops. > > 2 XPS 9310 acpidumps have been attached to: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920510 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1964974 > > Note the reporter of the first bug mentions that he is no longer having > this issue, but we are definitely still getting reports for kernel version > > 5.12.6 (which has the last 2 fixes) from XPS 9310 users... > > Maybe there are different BIOS versions in play ? It might be interesting > to compare the 2 acpidumps... ❯ diff -u ../tmp/ssdt7.dsl ../tmp2/ssdt7.dsl --- ../tmp/ssdt7.dsl 2021-07-09 21:32:06.473166420 +0300 +++ ../tmp2/ssdt7.dsl 2021-07-09 21:33:45.065934469 +0300 @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ * * Disassembling to symbolic ASL+ operators * - * Disassembly of ssdt7.dat, Fri Jul 9 21:32:06 2021 + * Disassembly of ssdt7.dat, Fri Jul 9 21:33:45 2021 * * Original Table Header: * Signature "SSDT" @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ 0xFED40000, // Address Base 0x00005000, // Address Length ) - Interrupt (ResourceConsumer, Level, ActiveLow, Shared, ,, _Y58) + Interrupt (ResourceConsumer, Level, ActiveLow, Shared, ,, _Y55) { 0x0000000C, } @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ } Else { - CreateDWordField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y58._INT, LIRQ) // _INT: Interrupts + CreateDWordField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y55._INT, LIRQ) // _INT: Interrupts LIRQ = IRQN /* \_SB_.TPM_.IRQN */ Return (RES0) /* \_SB_.TPM_.RES0 */ } @@ -152,14 +152,14 @@ If ((IRQN != Zero)) { CreateDWordField (Arg0, 0x11, IRQ0) - CreateDWordField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y58._INT, LIRQ) // _INT: Interrupts + CreateDWordField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y55._INT, LIRQ) // _INT: Interrupts LIRQ = IRQ0 /* \_SB_.TPM_._SRS.IRQ0 */ IRQN = IRQ0 /* \_SB_.TPM_._SRS.IRQ0 */ CreateBitField (Arg0, 0x79, ITRG) - CreateBitField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y58._HE, LTRG) // _HE_: High-Edge + CreateBitField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y55._HE, LTRG) // _HE_: High-Edge LTRG = ITRG /* \_SB_.TPM_._SRS.ITRG */ CreateBitField (Arg0, 0x7A, ILVL) - CreateBitField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y58._LL, LLVL) // _LL_: Low Level + CreateBitField (RES0, \_SB.TPM._Y55._LL, LLVL) // _LL_: Low Level LLVL = ILVL /* \_SB_.TPM_._SRS.ILVL */ If ((((TID0 & 0x0F) == Zero) || ((TID0 & 0x0F ) == 0x0F))) This delta from "acpidump for Dell XPS 9310 (with Qualcomm QCA6390)" to "acpidump output from a Dell XPS 13 9310 that no longer has a problem" in SSDT7. The bug I'm referring to is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1920510 Looks to me just using a different label. What if we just set "interrupts=0" explicitly for STM0125 HID since the workaround seems to work according to the report? /Jarkko
