Re: v5.4.289 failed to boot with error megasas_build_io_fusion 3219 sge_count (-12) is out of range

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 30.01.25 06:27, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:

On 30/01/25 3:31 AM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2025, Jürgen Groß wrote:
On 29.01.25 19:35, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:
On 29/01/25 4:52 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 29.01.25 10:15, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:
On 29/01/25 2:34 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:29:48PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:
Hi Greg,

On 29/01/25 2:18 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:13:34PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha wrote:
Hi there,

On 29/01/25 2:05 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 02:03:51PM +0530, Harshvardhan Jha
wrote:
Hi All,

+stable

There seems to be some formatting issues in my log output. I
have
attached it as a file.
Confused, what are you wanting us to do here in the stable
tree?

thanks,

greg k-h
Since, this is reproducible on 5.4.y I have added stable. The
culprit
commit which upon getting reverted fixes this issue is also
present in
5.4.y stable.
What culprit commit?  I see no information here :(

Remember, top-posting is evil...
My apologies,

The stable tag v5.4.289 seems to fail to boot with the following
prompt in an infinite loop:
[   24.427217] megaraid_sas 0000:65:00.0: megasas_build_io_fusion
3273 sge_count (-12) is out of range. Range is:  0-256

Reverting the following patch seems to fix the issue:

stable-5.4      : v5.4.285             - 5df29a445f3a xen/swiotlb:
add
alignment check for dma buffers

I tried changing swiotlb grub command line arguments but that didn't
seem to help much unfortunately and the error was seen again.

Ok, can you submit this revert with the information about why it
should
not be included in the 5.4.y tree and cc: everyone involved and then
we
will be glad to queue it up.

thanks,

greg k-h
This might be reproducible on other stable trees and mainline as well so
we will get it fixed there and I will submit the necessary fix to stable
when everything is sorted out on mainline.
Right. Just reverting my patch will trade one error with another one (the
one which triggered me to write the patch).

There are two possible ways to fix the issue:

- allow larger DMA buffers in xen/swiotlb (today 2MB are the max.
supported
    size, the megaraid_sas driver seems to effectively request 4MB)
This seems relatively simpler to implement but I'm not sure whether it's
the most optimal approach
Just making the static array larger used to hold the frame numbers for the
buffer seems to be a waste of memory for most configurations.

I'm thinking of an allocated array using the max needed size (replace a
former buffer with a larger one if needed).
You are referring to discontig_frames and MAX_CONTIG_ORDER in
arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c, right? I am not super familiar with that code but
it looks like a good way to go.

This rejected patch works on MAX_CONTIG_ORDER and doubles the buffer
size but that is undesirable in most situations:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/28947d4f-ab32-4a57-8dbb-e37fa4183a69@xxxxxxxx/t/

What needs to be done is the buffer size will only be doubled when needed.

I'll write a patch.


Juergen

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux