Re: applesmc oops in 3.10/3.11

[Guenter Roeck]

On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 03:34:41PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 
> On Oct 2, 2013, at 2:59 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:33:00PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Oct 2, 2013, at 12:02 PM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 07:24:10PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 09:47:18AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 06:34:18PM +0200, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> One thing I have seen in all logs is the earlier "send_byte fail" message, so
> >>>>>>>>> I think that is a pre-requisite.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Not necessarily - it could be that the patch actually fixes the root
> >>>>>>>> cause. One possible scenario is that on recent SMCs, some of the
> >>>>>>>> commands produce more data than we actually read. This would
> >>>>>>>> eventually lead to both data corruption and overflow somwhere in the
> >>>>>>>> SMC internals.  If the original SMC error is interpreted as a read
> >>>>>>>> buffer overflow, then that problem should be fixed with this patch.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Good point.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> But shouldn't we at least get the "flushed %d bytes" warning message in this case ?
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> The explanation I have there is that the (newer) SMC needs the
> >>>>>> application to read the 'no more bytes' or it will get confused. It
> >>>>>> makes sense, if the number of bytes to read is no longer specified.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>> You mean that just reading from APPLESMC_CMD_PORT would solve the problem ?
> >>>>> That might make sense.
> >>>> 
> >>>> It also points at the possibility of a smaller patch to test, but I
> >>>> have not had the time to check this very deeply myself:
> >>>> 
> >>> I like this patch much more than the previous patch. Chris, can you test it ?
> >> 
> >> Yes. Building now. What kernel message should I be looking for? At least on 2011 and 2012 laptops I have yet to see an Oops related to smc. The kernel with previous patch at least is not causing problems on them so far, which works well as I can test more on the 2008 model.
> >> 
> > None, if I understand correctly and if the patch really fixes the root cause
> > of the problem.
> 
> A vast majority of the Ooops I've had are when booting from flash media, testing Fedora installs. Is it possible the much slower kernel load and boot time is a trigger? If so, I'll look into modifying the media to accept the custom kernel and requisite fat initramfs.
> 
Yes, that could be a possible trigger. I thought it might be triggered by faster
boot (as one gets with 3.10 and 3.11), but slow boot is just as likely.

Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/