Re: `do_IRQ: 1.55 No irq handler for vector` on ASRock E350M1

[Morton, Eric]

Thomas,

Yazen dug out PLAT-21393 as sounding like this issue. I haven't had a chance to digest it.

Eric

ïOn 2/26/18, 10:31 AM, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 10:14:10AM -0600, Tom Lendacky wrote:
    > On 2/24/2018 2:59 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
    > > On Sat, 24 Feb 2018, Paul Menzel wrote:
    > >> Am 23.02.2018 um 20:09 schrieb Borislav Petkov:
    > >>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 07:18:34PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
    > >>>> Borislav is seeing similar issues on larger AMD machines. The interrupt
    > >>>> seems to come from BIOS/microcode during bringup of secondary CPUs and we
    > >>>> have no idea why.
    > >>>
    > >>> Paul, can you boot 4.14 and grep your dmesg for something like:
    > >>>
    > >>> [    0.000000] spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7. >
    > >>> ?
    > >>
    > >> No, I do not see that. Please find the logs attached.
    > > 
    > > From your 4.14 log:
    > > 
    > > Feb 19 09:48:06.843173 kodi kernel: CPU 0 irqstacks, hard=e9b0a000 soft=e9b0c000
    > > Feb 19 09:48:06.843216 kodi kernel: spurious 8259A interrupt: IRQ7.
    > 
    > I think I remember seeing something like this previously and it turned out
    > to be a BIOS bug.  All the AP's were enabled to work with the legacy 8259
    > interrupt controller.  In an SMP system, only one processor in the system
    > should be configured to handle legacy 8259 interrupts (ExtINT delivery
    > mode - see Intel's SDM, Volume 3, section 10.5.1, Delivery Mode).  Once
    > the BIOS was fixed, the spurious interrupt message went away.
    > 
    > I believe at some point during UEFI, the APs were exposed to an ExtINT
    > interrupt.  Since they were configured to handle ExtINT delivery mode and
    > interrupts were not yet enabled, the interrupt was left pending.  When the
    > APs were started by the OS and interrupts were enabled, the interrupt
    > triggered. Since the original pending interrupt was handled by the BSP,
    > there was no longer an interrupt actually pending, so the 8259 responds
    > with IRQ 7 when queried by the OS.  This occurred for each AP.
    
    Interesting - is this something that can happen on Zen too?
    
    Because I have such reports too.
    
    -- 
    Regards/Gruss,
        Boris.
    
    Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.