Re: Excess dmesg output from ACPIPHP on boot (was: Re: [PATCH 25/30] ACPI / hotplug / PCI: Check for new devices on enabled slots)
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Thu Sep 05 2013 - 18:30:11 EST
On Thursday, September 05, 2013 04:17:25 PM Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-09-05 at 23:39 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 05, 2013 09:44:26 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Thursday, September 05, 2013 08:21:41 AM Alex Williamson wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > [ 18.288122] pci 0000:00:00.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288127] pcieport 0000:00:01.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288142] pci 0000:01:00.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288157] pci 0000:01:00.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288162] pcieport 0000:00:03.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288176] pci 0000:02:00.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288190] pci 0000:02:00.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288195] pcieport 0000:00:07.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288209] pci 0000:03:00.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288224] pci 0000:03:00.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288228] pci 0000:00:14.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288233] pci 0000:00:14.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288237] pci 0000:00:14.2: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288242] pci 0000:00:16.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288247] pci 0000:00:16.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288251] pci 0000:00:16.2: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288256] pci 0000:00:16.3: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288260] pci 0000:00:16.4: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288265] pci 0000:00:16.5: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288269] pci 0000:00:16.6: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288274] pci 0000:00:16.7: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288278] pci 0000:00:1a.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288279] pci 0000:00:1a.0: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288292] pci 0000:00:1a.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288293] pci 0000:00:1a.1: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288307] ehci-pci 0000:00:1a.7: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288308] ehci-pci 0000:00:1a.7: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288322] pci 0000:00:1b.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288327] pcieport 0000:00:1c.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288332] pcieport 0000:00:1c.4: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288344] pci 0000:05:00.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288349] pci 0000:00:1d.0: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288350] pci 0000:00:1d.0: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288360] pci 0000:00:1d.1: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288361] pci 0000:00:1d.1: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288374] pci 0000:00:1d.2: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288374] pci 0000:00:1d.2: using default PCI settings
> > > > > [ 18.288387] pci 0000:00:1d.3: no hotplug settings from platform
> > > > > [ 18.288387] pci 0000:00:1d.3: using default PCI settings
> > > > >
> > > > > The boot is noticeably slower. What's going to happen on systems that
> > > > > actually have a significant I/O topology vs my little workstation?
> > >
> > > That depends on how many bus check/device check events they generate on boot.
> > >
> > > My test machines don't generate them during boot at all (even the one with
> > > a Thunderbolt connector), so I don't see the messages in question during boot
> > > on any of them. Mika doesn't see them either I suppose, or he would have told
> > > me about that before.
> > >
> > > And let's just make it clear that it is not usual or even OK to generate bus
> > > checks or device checks during boot like this. And since the changes in
> > > question have been in linux-next since right after the 3.11 merge window, I
> > > think that someone would have complained already had that been a common issue.
> > >
> > > Of course, we need to deal with that somehow nevertheless. :-)
> > >
> > > > Just to give you an idea:
> > > >
> > > > CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI=y
> > > >
> > > > $ dmesg | wc
> > > > 5697 49935 384368
> > > >
> > > > $ dmesg | tail --lines=1
> > > > [ 53.137123] Ebtables v2.0 registered
> > > >
> > > > -- vs --
> > > >
> > > > # CONFIG_HOTPLUG_PCI_ACPI is not set
> > > >
> > > > $ dmesg | wc
> > > > 1053 9176 71652
> > > >
> > > > $dmesg | tail --lines=1
> > > > [ 28.917220] Ebtables v2.0 registered
> > > >
> > > > So it spews out 5x more output with acpiphp enabled and takes and extra
> > > > 24s to boot (nearly 2x). Not good.
> > >
> > > The "no hotplug settings from platform" message is from pci_configure_slot().
> > > I think the messages you're seeing are from the call to it in
> > > acpiphp_set_hpp_values() which is called by enable_slot().
> > >
> > > There, I think, we can simply check the return value of pci_scan_slot() and
> > > if that is 0 (no new devices), we can just skip everything under the call to
> > > __pci_bus_assign_resources().
> > >
> > > However, we can't skip the scanning of bridges, if any, because there may be
> > > new devices below them and I guess that's what takes so much time on your
> > > machine.
> >
> > OK, one piece is missing. We may need to evaluate _OSC after handling each
> > event to let the platform know the status.
> >
> > Can you please check if the appended patch makes any difference (with the
> > previous fix applied, of course)?
> >
> > If fact, it is two patches combined. One of them optimizes enable_slot()
> > slightly and the other adds the missing _OSC evaluation.
>
> Better, still double the output:
>
> $ dmesg | wc
> 2169 19047 152710
I see.
What about the timing?
> $ dmesg | tail --lines=1
> [ 39.980918] Ebtables v2.0 registered
>
> Here's another interesting stat:
>
> $ dmesg | colrm 1 15 | sort | uniq -c | sort -nr | head --lines=25
> 73 pci 0000:00:1f.0: BAR 13: [io 0x1000-0x107f] has bogus alignment
> 73 pci 0000:00:1e.0: PCI bridge to [bus 06]
> 64 pci 0000:00:1e.0: bridge window [mem 0x81100000-0x812fffff 64bit pref]
> 64 pci 0000:00:1e.0: bridge window [mem 0x80f00000-0x810fffff]
> 64 pci 0000:00:1e.0: bridge window [io 0x7000-0x7fff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:1c.4: PCI bridge to [bus 05]
> 38 pci 0000:00:1c.4: bridge window [mem 0xf4f00000-0xf4ffffff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:1c.0: PCI bridge to [bus 04]
> 38 pci 0000:00:07.0: PCI bridge to [bus 03]
> 38 pci 0000:00:07.0: bridge window [mem 0xf2000000-0xf40fffff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:07.0: bridge window [mem 0xe0000000-0xf1ffffff 64bit pref]
> 38 pci 0000:00:07.0: bridge window [io 0x4000-0x4fff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:03.0: PCI bridge to [bus 02]
> 38 pci 0000:00:03.0: bridge window [mem 0xf4e00000-0xf4efffff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:03.0: bridge window [mem 0xd0000000-0xdfffffff 64bit pref]
> 38 pci 0000:00:03.0: bridge window [io 0x3000-0x3fff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:01.0: PCI bridge to [bus 01]
> 38 pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [mem 0xf4100000-0xf4bfffff]
> 38 pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [io 0x2000-0x2fff]
> 37 pci 0000:00:1c.4: bridge window [mem 0x80c00000-0x80dfffff 64bit pref]
> 37 pci 0000:00:1c.4: bridge window [io 0x6000-0x6fff]
> 37 pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [mem 0x80a00000-0x80bfffff 64bit pref]
> 37 pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [mem 0x80800000-0x809fffff]
> 37 pci 0000:00:1c.0: bridge window [io 0x5000-0x5fff]
> 36 pci 0000:00:01.0: bridge window [mem 0x80000000-0x807fffff 64bit pref]
>
> This is nearly the entire difference, just 25 lines repeated over and
> over.
Well, this is the bridge sizing I talked about previously. We still get
apparently spurious bus check/device check events and they trigger bridge
scans.
I'm not sure what to do about that and I wonder whether or not this is
reproducible on any other machines you can test.
Can you please change dbg() to pr_info() under ACPI_NOTIFY_BUS_CHECK and
ACPI_NOTIFY_DEVICE_CHECK in hotplug_event() (acpiphp_glue.c), grep the boot
dmesg log for "check notify" and send the result? I'm wondering what's
going on there.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/