On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 09:00:02AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 01:41:01AM +0000, Chris Packham wrote: > > > > On 2/06/23 16:19, Chris Packham wrote: > > > > > > On 2/06/23 16:10, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > >> On 5/29/23 09:37, Chris Packham wrote: > > >>> On 29/05/23 14:04, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > >>>> On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 11:42:50PM +0000, Chris Packham wrote: > > >>>>> Hi, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> We have an embedded product with an Infineon SLM9670 TPM. After > > >>>>> updating > > >>>>> to a newer LTS kernel version we started seeing the following > > >>>>> warning at > > >>>>> boot. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> [ 4.741025] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > >>>>> [ 4.749894] irq 38 handler tis_int_handler+0x0/0x154 enabled > > >>>>> interrupts > > >>>>> [ 4.756555] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at kernel/irq/handle.c:159 > > >>>>> __handle_irq_event_percpu+0xf4/0x180 > > >>>>> [ 4.765557] Modules linked in: > > >>>>> [ 4.768626] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.113 #1 > > >>>>> [ 4.774747] Hardware name: Allied Telesis x250-18XS (DT) > > >>>>> [ 4.780080] pstate: 60000005 (nZCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS > > >>>>> BTYPE=--) > > >>>>> [ 4.787072] pc : __handle_irq_event_percpu+0xf4/0x180 > > >>>>> [ 4.792146] lr : __handle_irq_event_percpu+0xf4/0x180 > > >>>>> [ 4.797220] sp : ffff800008003e40 > > >>>>> [ 4.800547] x29: ffff800008003e40 x28: ffff8000093951c0 x27: > > >>>>> ffff80000902a9b8 > > >>>>> [ 4.807716] x26: ffff800008fe8d28 x25: ffff8000094a62bd x24: > > >>>>> ffff000001b92400 > > >>>>> [ 4.814885] x23: 0000000000000026 x22: ffff800008003ec4 x21: > > >>>>> 0000000000000000 > > >>>>> [ 4.822053] x20: 0000000000000001 x19: ffff000002381200 x18: > > >>>>> ffffffffffffffff > > >>>>> [ 4.829222] x17: ffff800076962000 x16: ffff800008000000 x15: > > >>>>> ffff800088003b57 > > >>>>> [ 4.836390] x14: 0000000000000000 x13: ffff8000093a5078 x12: > > >>>>> 000000000000035d > > >>>>> [ 4.843558] x11: 000000000000011f x10: ffff8000093a5078 x9 : > > >>>>> ffff8000093a5078 > > >>>>> [ 4.850727] x8 : 00000000ffffefff x7 : ffff8000093fd078 x6 : > > >>>>> ffff8000093fd078 > > >>>>> [ 4.857895] x5 : 000000000000bff4 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : > > >>>>> 0000000000000000 > > >>>>> [ 4.865062] x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : > > >>>>> ffff8000093951c0 > > >>>>> [ 4.872230] Call trace: > > >>>>> [ 4.874686] __handle_irq_event_percpu+0xf4/0x180 > > >>>>> [ 4.879411] handle_irq_event+0x64/0xec > > >>>>> [ 4.883264] handle_level_irq+0xc0/0x1b0 > > >>>>> [ 4.887202] generic_handle_irq+0x30/0x50 > > >>>>> [ 4.891229] mvebu_gpio_irq_handler+0x11c/0x2a0 > > >>>>> [ 4.895780] handle_domain_irq+0x60/0x90 > > >>>>> [ 4.899720] gic_handle_irq+0x4c/0xd0 > > >>>>> [ 4.903398] call_on_irq_stack+0x20/0x4c > > >>>>> [ 4.907338] do_interrupt_handler+0x54/0x60 > > >>>>> [ 4.911538] el1_interrupt+0x30/0x80 > > >>>>> [ 4.915130] el1h_64_irq_handler+0x18/0x24 > > >>>>> [ 4.919244] el1h_64_irq+0x78/0x7c > > >>>>> [ 4.922659] arch_cpu_idle+0x18/0x2c > > >>>>> [ 4.926249] do_idle+0xc4/0x150 > > >>>>> [ 4.929404] cpu_startup_entry+0x28/0x60 > > >>>>> [ 4.933343] rest_init+0xe4/0xf4 > > >>>>> [ 4.936584] arch_call_rest_init+0x10/0x1c > > >>>>> [ 4.940699] start_kernel+0x600/0x640 > > >>>>> [ 4.944375] __primary_switched+0xbc/0xc4 > > >>>>> [ 4.948402] ---[ end trace 940193047b35b311 ]--- > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Initially I dismissed this as a warning that would probably be > > >>>>> cleaned > > >>>>> up when we did more work on the TPM support for our product but we > > >>>>> also > > >>>>> seem to be getting some new i2c issues and possibly a kernel stack > > >>>>> corruption that we've conflated with this TPM warning. > > >>>> Can you reproduce this issue on mainline? Can you also bisect to find > > >>>> the culprit? > > >>> No the error doesn't appear on a recent mainline kernel. I do still get > > >>> > > >>> tpm_tis_spi spi1.1: 2.0 TPM (device-id 0x1B, rev-id 22) > > >>> tpm tpm0: [Firmware Bug]: TPM interrupt not working, polling instead > > >>> tpm tpm0: A TPM error (256) occurred attempting the self test > > >>> > > >>> but I think I was getting that on v5.15.110 > > >>> > > >> I repeat: Can you bisect between v5.15 and v5.15.112? > > > > > > It's definitely between v5.15.110 and v5.15.112. > > > > > > I'll do a proper bisect next week but I'm pretty sure it's related to > > > the "tpm, tpm_tis:" series. The problem can be worked around by > > > removing the TPM interrupt from the device tree for the board. > > > > Bisecting between v5.15.110 and v5.15.112 points to > > > > 51162b05a44cb5d98fb0ae2519a860910a47fd4b is the first bad commit > > Thanks for the bisection. > > Lino, it looks like this regression is caused by (backported) commit of yours. > Would you like to take a look on it? > > Anyway, telling regzbot: > > #regzbot introduced: 51162b05a44cb5 There's some tpm backports to 5.15.y that were suspect and I'll look into reverting them and see if this was one of the ones that was on that list. Give me a few days... thanks, greg k-h
