On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 04:20:33PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 02:02:03PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 7:53 AM Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 04:10:54PM +0100, Donald Hunter wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 2 Apr 2023 at 23:55, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > On Sat, Apr 01, 2023 at 01:52:25PM +0100, Donald Hunter wrote: > > > >> > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 at 20:42, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I assume this igb NIC (07:00.0) must be built-in (not a plug-in card) > > > >> > > > because it apparently has an ACPI firmware node, and there's something > > > >> > > > we don't expect about its status? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Yes they are built-in, to my knowledge. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Hopefully Rob will look at this. If I were looking, I would be > > > >> > > > interested in acpidump to see what's in the DSDT. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I can get an acpidump. Is there a preferred way to share the files, or just > > > >> > > an email attachment? > > > >> > > > > >> > I think by default acpidump produces ASCII that can be directly > > > >> > included in email. http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html says > > > >> > 100K is the limit for vger mailing lists. Or you could open a report > > > >> > at https://bugzilla.kernel.org and attach it there, maybe along with a > > > >> > complete dmesg log and "sudo lspci -vv" output. > > > >> > > > >> Apologies for the delay, I was unable to access the machine while travelling. > > > >> > > > >> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217317 > > > > > > > > Thanks for that! Can you boot a kernel with 6fffbc7ae137 reverted > > > > with this in the kernel parameters: > > > > > > > > dyndbg="file drivers/acpi/* +p" > > > > > > > > and collect the entire dmesg log? > > > > > > Added to the bugzilla report. > > > > Rafael, Andy, Any ideas why fwnode_device_is_available() would return > > false for a built-in PCI device with a ACPI device entry? The only > > thing I see in the log is it looks like the parent PCI bridge/bus > > doesn't have ACPI device entry (based on "[ 0.913389] pci_bus > > 0000:07: No ACPI support"). For DT, if the parent doesn't have a node, > > then the child can't. Not sure on ACPI. > > Thanks for the Cc'ing. I haven't checked anything yet, but from the above it > sounds like a BIOS issue. If PCI has no ACPI companion tree, then why the heck > one of the devices has the entry? I'm not even sure this is allowed by ACPI > specification, but as I said, I just solely used the above mail. ACPI r6.5, sec 6.3.7, about _STA says: - Bit [0] - Set if the device is present. - Bit [1] - Set if the device is enabled and decoding its resources. - Bit [3] - Set if the device is functioning properly (cleared if device failed its diagnostics). ... If a device is present on an enumerable bus, then _STA must not return 0. In that case, bit[0] must be set and if the status of the device can be determined through a bus-specific enumeration and discovery mechanism, it must be reflected by the values of bit[1] and bit[3], even though the OSPM is not required to take them into account. Since PCI *is* an enumerable bus, I don't think we can use _STA to decide whether a PCI device is present. We can use _STA to decide whether a host bridge is present, of course, but that doesn't help here because the host bridge in question is PNP0A08:00 that leads to [bus 00-3d], and it is present. I don't know exactly what path led to the igb issue, but I don't think we need to figure that out. I think we just need to avoid the use of _STA in fwnode_device_is_available(). 6fffbc7ae137 ("PCI: Honor firmware's device disabled status") appeared in v6.3-rc1, so I think we need to revert or fix it before v6.3, which will probably be tagged Sunday (and I'll be on vacation Friday-Monday). Bjorn
