On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 09:39:54AM +0800, Ethan Zhao wrote: > On 3/25/2024 6:15 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > On Mon, 2024-03-25 at 16:45 +0800, Ethan Zhao wrote: > > > On 3/25/2024 1:19 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2023-09-18 at 14:39 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 07:42:30PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > My workstation suffers from too much correctable AER reporting as well > > > > > > (related to Intel's errata "RPL013: Incorrectly Formed PCIe Packets May > > > > > > Generate Correctable Errors" and/or the motherboard design, I guess). > > > > > We should rate-limit correctable error reporting so it's not > > > > > overwhelming. > > > > > > > > > > At the same time, I'm *also* interested in the cause of these errors, > > > > > in case there's a Linux defect or a hardware erratum that we can work > > > > > around. Do you have a bug report with any more details, e.g., a dmesg > > > > > log and "sudo lspci -vv" output? > > > > Hi Bjorn, > > > > > > > > Sorry for the *very* late reply (somehow I didn't see the reply at all > > > > before it was removed by my cron job, and now I just savaged it from > > > > lore.kernel.org...) > > > > > > > > The dmesg is like: > > > > > > > > [ 882.456994] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1 > > > > [ 882.457002] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: found no error details for 0000:00:1c.1 > > > > [ 882.457003] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:06:00.0 > > > > [ 883.545763] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1 > > > > [ 883.545789] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Physical Layer, (Receiver ID) > > > > [ 883.545790] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: device [8086:7a39] error status/mask=00000001/00002000 > > > > [ 883.545792] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: [ 0] RxErr (First) > > > > [ 883.545794] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Error of this Agent is reported first > > > > [ 883.545798] r8169 0000:06:00.0: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Correctable, type=Physical Layer, (Transmitter ID) > > > > [ 883.545799] r8169 0000:06:00.0: device [10ec:8125] error status/mask=00001101/0000e000 > > > > [ 883.545800] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [ 0] RxErr (First) > > > > [ 883.545801] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [ 8] Rollover > > > > [ 883.545802] r8169 0000:06:00.0: [12] Timeout > > > > [ 883.545815] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Correctable error message received from 0000:00:1c.1 > > > > [ 883.545823] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: found no error details for 0000:00:1c.1 > > > > [ 883.545824] pcieport 0000:00:1c.1: AER: Multiple Correctable error message received from 0000:06:00.0 > > > > > > > > lspci output attached. > > > > > > > > Intel has issued an errata "RPL013" saying: > > > > > > > > "Under complex microarchitectural conditions, the PCIe controller may > > > > transmit an incorrectly formed Transaction Layer Packet (TLP), which > > > > will fail CRC checks. When this erratum occurs, the PCIe end point may > > > > record correctable errors resulting in either a NAK or link recovery. > > > > Intel® has not observed any functional impact due to this erratum." > > > > > > > > But I'm really unsure if it describes my issue. > > > > > > > > Do you think I have some broken hardware and I should replace the CPU > > > > and/or the motherboard (where the r8169 is soldered)? I've noticed that > > > > my 13900K is almost impossible to overclock (despite it's a K), but I've > > > > not encountered any issue other than these AER reporting so far after I > > > > gave up overclocking. > > > Seems there are two r8169 nics on your board, only 0000:06:00.0 reports > > > aer errors, how about another one the 0000:07:00.0 nic ? > > It never happens to 0000:07:00.0, even if I plug the ethernet cable into > > it instead of 0000:06:00.0. > > So something is wrong with the physical layer, I guess. > > > Maybe I should just use 0000:07:00.0 and blacklist 0000:06:00.0 as I > > don't need two NICs? > > Yup, > ratelimit the AER warning is another choice instead of change WARN to INFO. > if corrected error flood happens, even the function is working, suggests > something was already wrong, likely will be worse, that is the meaning of > WARN I think. We should fix this. IMHO Correctable Errors should be "info" level, non-alarming, and rate-limited. They're basically hints about link integrity. Bjorn
