On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 08:47:23PM +0200, Juergen Lock wrote: > In article <20090916190142.GC770_at_volta.aurel32.net> you write: > >On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 06:52:22PM +0200, Juergen Lock wrote: > >> On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 02:26:51PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> > Juergen Lock wrote: > >> > > Hi! > >> > > > >> > > I got a report of FreeBSD guest's new uart(4) driver misbehaving in > >> > > qemu again(?) (output stopping for no apparent reason), and now found > >> > > out the problem is tx irqs (UART_IIR_THRI) are getting lost because > >> > > serial_update_irq() checks for the rx condtion, > >> > > ... if ((s->ier & UART_IER_RDI) && (s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR)) > >> > > first before checking for the tx irq condition, > >> > > ... if ((s->ier & UART_IER_THRI) && s->thr_ipending) > >> > > which at least in this case (FreeBSD 8 guest after doing > >> > > set console="comconsole" > >> > > at the loader prompt or when simply echo'ing text to /dev/ttyu0 > >> > > or typing to the serial port from cu(1) on a `regular' vga console) > >> > > causes the second condition (.. && s->thr_ipending) to be never > >> > > reached anymore, or only after a very long delay. Moving that > >> > > condition up so it is checked first like this, > >> > > > >> > > Index: qemu/hw/serial.c > >> > > _at__at_ -189,7 +188,9 _at__at_ static void serial_update_irq(SerialStat > >> > > { > >> > > uint8_t tmp_iir = UART_IIR_NO_INT; > >> > > > >> > > - if ((s->ier & UART_IER_RLSI) && (s->lsr & UART_LSR_INT_ANY)) { > >> > > + if ((s->ier & UART_IER_THRI) && s->thr_ipending) { > >> > > + tmp_iir = UART_IIR_THRI; > >> > > + } else if ((s->ier & UART_IER_RLSI) && (s->lsr & UART_LSR_INT_ANY)) { > >> > > tmp_iir = UART_IIR_RLSI; > >> > > } else if ((s->ier & UART_IER_RDI) && s->timeout_ipending) { > >> > > /* Note that(s->ier & UART_IER_RDI) can mask this interrupt, > >> > > _at__at_ -202,8 +203,6 _at__at_ static void serial_update_irq(SerialStat > >> > > } else if (s->recv_fifo.count >= s->recv_fifo.itl) { > >> > > tmp_iir = UART_IIR_RDI; > >> > > } > >> > > - } else if ((s->ier & UART_IER_THRI) && s->thr_ipending) { > >> > > - tmp_iir = UART_IIR_THRI; > >> > > } else if ((s->ier & UART_IER_MSI) && (s->msr & UART_MSR_ANY_DELTA)) { > >> > > tmp_iir = UART_IIR_MSI; > >> > > } > >> > > > >> > > ...fixes the issue for me, but I'm not 100% sure if this might cause > >> > > rx irqs to come (too?) late when a guest keeps sending while its > >> > > receiving at the same time. Anyone care to comment? :) > >> > > >> > The reordering violates the 16550A spec in that RX event overrules TX in > >> > the IRQ status register. Maybe something else is wrong but it's not the > >> > ordering in serial_update_irq. > >> > >> Well one problem seems to be the rx condition, > >> ... if ((s->ier & UART_IER_RDI) && (s->lsr & UART_LSR_DR)) > >> is not enough to trigger an irq, yet still causes the following > >> conditions not to be checked anymore at all. And ideed, fixing that > >> seems to get my FreeBSD 8 guest back to working order as well: > > > >Applied. In the future, could you please make sure to send patches with > >a correct unified headers? > > Alright, if thats is what you guys prefer... (I just didn't want to > break the thread.) Don't need to break the thread, just use | --- a/hw/serial.c | +++ a/hw/serial.c instead of simply | Index: qemu/hw/serial.c ie the output of diff -u > Anyway, I guess this is also material for the stable branch(es)? > (I just saw 0.11.0 has already been tagged but not announced yet, and > another patch merged to the same branch after that, maybe the tag can > still be slided if this is possible with git?) > Pushed to the branch. For the details about the release, I let Anthony handling that. Worst case scenario, it will be in 0.11.1. -- Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 aurelien_at_aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.netReceived on Thu Sep 24 2009 - 14:20:05 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:56 UTC