2015-06-21 16:03 keltezéssel, Bjorn Helgaas írta: > [+cc linux-pci] > > Hi Boszormenyi, > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 5:34 AM, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote: >> Hi, >> >> please, cc me, I am not subscribed to lkml. >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> [lkml.org still broken --> no accurate mail header info possible...] >>> >>> Just to ask the obvious: >>> I assume using /sys/bus/pci/rescan does not help once it's broken? >>> (since the machine comes up empty at initial-boot scan, too) >> I will try it, too, but I am not sure it would work. >> >> Currently I can't test it because the last time I completely discharged >> the battery. I also disconnected it to be able to get the realtek chip back >> immediately for faster testing. Now, that I have reconnected the battery, >> I need to wait for it to be charged somewhat to be able to reproduce >> losing the network chip. >> >>> Also, you could try diffing lspci -vvxxx -s.... output >>> of working vs. "distorting" kernel version - perhaps some register setup >>> has been changed (e.g. due to power management improvements or some such), >>> which may encourage the card >>> to get a problematic/corrupt state. >> I attached a tarball that contains lspci -vvxxx for >> - all devices / only the network chip >> - before / after "modprobe r8169" >> - for all 3 kernel versions tested. >> >> I figured out that if I type the modprobe and lspci in the same command line, >> I can get diagnostics out of the machine, after all. >> >> It's not just the Realtek chip that has changed parameters. >> >> (Vague idea) I noticed that some devices have changed like this: >> >> - Memory behind bridge: 80000000-801fffff >> - Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 0000000080200000-00000000803fffff >> + Memory behind bridge: ff000000-ff1fffff >> + Prefetchable memory behind bridge: 00000000ff200000-00000000ff3fffff >> >> Can't this cause a problem? E.g. programming the bridge with an address range >> that the bridge doesn't actually support? > This worked in v3.18.16, but not in v4.0.5 or v4.1.0-rc8. You > attached a v4.1.0-rc8 dmesg log earlier. Would you mind collecting a > v3.18.16 dmesg log, so we can compare them? I collected all 3 for you to compare them, compressed, attached. BTW, I browsed git log and found 2ea3d266bab3b497238113b20136f7c3f69ad9c0 as suspicious. I will try the 4.0/4.1 kernels with this one reverted. > > These (from the v4.1.0-rc8 dmesg) look wrong, but I'll have to look at > the code to see what might be going on: > > acpi PNP0A08:00: host bridge window expanded to [mem > 0x00000000-0xffffffff window]; [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffff window] > ignored > pci 0000:00:1c.1: can't claim BAR 15 [mem 0xfdf00000-0xfdffffff > 64bit pref]: address conflict with PCI Bus 0000:00 [mem > 0xf0000000-0xfed8ffff window] > > Bjorn > Thanks, Zoltán Böszörményi