Bug 684708

Summary: RSS: RHEL6: Only 2 out of 4 available serial ports working
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: IBM Bug Proxy <bugproxy>
Component: kernelAssignee: Prarit Bhargava <prarit>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Red Hat Kernel QE team <kernel-qe>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 6.0CC: arozansk, balkov, jjarvis, jkachuck
Target Milestone: betaKeywords: Reopened
Target Release: 6.2   
Hardware: other   
OS: All   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-09-28 04:46:59 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 684953    
Attachments:
Description Flags
sysctl -a
none
dmesg output
none
setserial ???g /dev/ttyS* output
none
Anaconda log
none
lspci -vv output
none
sosreport (4800-783) none

Description IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:51:42 UTC
---Problem Description---
Only 2 serial ports are working, instead of the 4 physical ports that is available on the machine.
Tried to expand the available ports to 8 by passing the boot parameter '8250.nr_uarts=8', but the
other ports are still not responding
 
---uname output---
Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.32-71.el6.i686 #1 SMP Wed Sep 1 01:26:34 EDT 2010 i686 i686 i386
GNU/Linux
 
Machine Type = ALL 
 
---Debugger---
A debugger is not configured
 
---Steps to Reproduce---
 Connected a serial loopback device on the port to be tested. 

Execute cat /dev/ttySx, where x is the port number ranging from 0 to 3
Opened another terminal window to echo text to the port /dev/ttySx
Only port 0 and 1 responded. Ports 2 and 3 had no response.

Restarted the machine and included the boot parameter '8250.nr_uarts=8' and performed the following
commands for each of the ports to be tested:

'stty -F /dev/ttySx 19200'
'setserial /dev/ttySx uart 16550A ^fourport'
'stty -F /dev/ttySx raw -echo'

Again perform the same actions to echo text to the ports, this time extending to ports 4 to 7. There
was no response from the ports other than port 0 and 1.
 
---Kernel - IO Component Data--- 
Stack trace output:
 no
 
Oops output:
 no
 

sysctl -a output 

dmesg output

setserial ???g /dev/ttyS* output

Anaconda log

lspci -vv output


=Comment: #2=================================================

Serial driver settings in /boot/config-2.6.32-71.el6.i686 file 
================================
# Serial drivers
#
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_FIX_EARLYCON_MEM=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_PCI=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_PNP=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_CS=m
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_NR_UARTS=32
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_RUNTIME_UARTS=4
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_EXTENDED=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_MANY_PORTS=y
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_FOURPORT is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_ACCENT is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_BOCA is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_EXAR_ST16C554 is not set
# CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_HUB6 is not set
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_SHARE_IRQ=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_DETECT_IRQ=y
CONFIG_SERIAL_8250_RSA=y

     
 We need to provide below information while mirroring the bug to RedHat. Please
provide the following -
 Server architecture(s) (please list all effected) (x86/POWER6/Z/etc.):   x86 - 32

Server type (9117-MMA/HS20/s390/etc.):  ALL - x86 machines 

General component (desktop/kernel/base OS/dev tools/etc.):  Kernel IO

Other components involved (ixgbe/java/emulex/etc.):  N/A

Does the server have the latest GA firmware?  yes

Has the problem been shown to occur on more than one system?  yes

 Is a tested patch available? no

If yes to the above, has it been approved upstream?  N/A

What is the latest official Red Hat build on which this bug has been seen? RHEL 6 / RHEL 6.1 Alpha.
( This issue is first observed in RHEL6. Later we tried with RHEL6.1 Alpha and we found that the
issue exists in 6.1 as well)

Comment 1 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:51:47 UTC
Created attachment 484121 [details]
sysctl -a

Comment 2 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:51:51 UTC
Created attachment 484122 [details]
dmesg output

Comment 3 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:51:55 UTC
Created attachment 484123 [details]
setserial ???g /dev/ttyS* output

Comment 4 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:51:58 UTC
Created attachment 484124 [details]
Anaconda log

Comment 5 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-14 09:52:02 UTC
Created attachment 484125 [details]
lspci -vv output

Comment 7 Prarit Bhargava 2011-03-24 15:00:50 UTC
From the console log:

serial 0000:04:0b.1: PCI INT B -> GSI 16 (level, low) -> IRQ 16
0000:04:0b.1: ttyS2 at I/O 0x8800 (irq = 16) is a 16550A
0000:04:0b.1: ttyS3 at I/O 0x8400 (irq = 16) is a 16550A
Couldn't register serial port 0000:04:0b.1: -28

... which is -ENOSPC which AFAICT, is only returned if ...

int serial8250_register_port(struct uart_port *port)
{
        struct uart_8250_port *uart;
        int ret = -ENOSPC;

        if (port->uartclk == 0)
                return -EINVAL;

        mutex_lock(&serial_mutex);

        uart = serial8250_find_match_or_unused(port);
        if (uart) {
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^ this fails.

I'll try and find a system in our lab that has this problem.

P.

Comment 8 Prarit Bhargava 2011-03-24 23:21:10 UTC
Could the reporter please provide an actual system name instead of just "ALL" :/.  

P.

Comment 9 Prarit Bhargava 2011-03-24 23:28:20 UTC
Server type (9117-MMA/HS20/s390/etc.):  ALL - x86 machines 

I just spent an hour on an ibm-x3650m3 trying to reproduce.  Clearly the above statement is not true.

Closed -- INSUFFICIENT_DATA.

P.

Comment 10 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-25 03:41:37 UTC
Created attachment 487451 [details]
sosreport (4800-783)


------- Comment on attachment From  2011-03-24 23:30 EDT-------


(In reply to comment #22)
> Server type (9117-MMA/HS20/s390/etc.):  ALL - x86 machines
ALL - x86 machines = all IBM Point of Sales SurePOS
> 
> 
> Closed -- INSUFFICIENT_DATA.
Please help to reopen this bugzilla with redhat since they have closed it.

Has also attached a sosreport from a problem machine (4800-783) as sample

Comment 11 Prarit Bhargava 2011-03-25 12:19:46 UTC
(In reply to comment #10)
> Created attachment 487451 [details]
> sosreport (4800-783)
> 
> 
> ------- Comment on attachment From  2011-03-24 23:30 EDT-------
> 
> 
> (In reply to comment #22)
> > Server type (9117-MMA/HS20/s390/etc.):  ALL - x86 machines
> ALL - x86 machines = all IBM Point of Sales SurePOS

Can we please get a list of actual model #s please?

P.

Comment 12 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-03-28 02:11:39 UTC
------- Comment From  2011-03-27 22:06 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #24)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > Created attachment 487451 [details]
> > sosreport (4800-783)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > (In reply to comment #22)
> > > Server type (9117-MMA/HS20/s390/etc.):  ALL - x86 machines
> > ALL - x86 machines = all IBM Point of Sales SurePOS
> Can we please get a list of actual model #s please?
> P.

The following models were tested and had the problem:

4800-742
4800-743
4800-782
4800-783
4800-784
4800-F43

Comment 13 Prarit Bhargava 2011-03-29 12:18:47 UTC
I'll see if we have any of these systems available internally.

P.

Comment 14 RHEL Program Management 2011-04-04 02:22:53 UTC
Since RHEL 6.1 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.

Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Comment 15 Prarit Bhargava 2011-04-04 14:46:14 UTC
Red Hat does not have any of these systems available internally.  IBM -- any idea if you can set up remote access for one of these systems?

P.

Comment 16 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-04-05 02:51:40 UTC
------- Comment From  2011-04-04 22:44 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #28)
> Red Hat does not have any of these systems available internally.  IBM -- any
> idea if you can set up remote access for one of these systems?
> P.

Hi. We are not able to set up any remote access on our side. Could you kindly let us know any information that you require or any steps that you need us to perform on our end?

Comment 17 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-04-14 09:21:43 UTC
------- Comment From vahegde1.ibm.com 2011-04-14 05:12 EDT-------
Hello Red Hat ,

Do you need any details on this bug ? How to go forward with this ?

Thanks
Vasant

Comment 18 Prarit Bhargava 2011-04-20 12:34:12 UTC
(In reply to comment #17)
> ------- Comment From vahegde1.ibm.com 2011-04-14 05:12 EDT-------
> Hello Red Hat ,
> 
> Do you need any details on this bug ? How to go forward with this ?
> 
> Thanks
> Vasant

Can you reproduce this issue on a system @ IBM?  If so, I can put together a debug kernel and we can debug that way ....

P.

Comment 19 John Jarvis 2011-04-21 17:52:11 UTC
This bug does not meet the Release Candidate blocker definition, moving to 6.2.

Comment 20 John Jarvis 2011-04-21 17:56:36 UTC
IBM, for any progress to be made on this bug, you need to send the hardware to Westford and get a repro of the issue set up.  Please work with the TAM to get this done.

Comment 21 Joseph Kachuck 2011-04-21 19:11:05 UTC
Sent an email to vahegde1.ibm.com to see if he can point me to who to talk to in IBM to get this hardware.

Comment 22 Joseph Kachuck 2011-09-27 19:00:33 UTC
Hello IBM,
I think this issue was resolved, if not please confirm.

Thank You
Joe Kachuck

Comment 23 IBM Bug Proxy 2011-09-28 02:11:11 UTC
------- Comment From neogw.com 2011-09-27 22:06 EDT-------
(In reply to comment #55)
> Hello IBM,
> I think this issue was resolved, if not please confirm.
> Thank You
> Joe Kachuck

yes, you could close this.