Hide Forgot
---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)
Created attachment 484121 [details] sysctl -a
Created attachment 484122 [details] dmesg output
Created attachment 484123 [details] setserial ???g /dev/ttyS* output
Created attachment 484124 [details] Anaconda log
Created attachment 484125 [details] lspci -vv output
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.
Could the reporter please provide an actual system name instead of just "ALL" :/. P.
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.
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
(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 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
I'll see if we have any of these systems available internally. P.
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.
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 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 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
(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.
This bug does not meet the Release Candidate blocker definition, moving to 6.2.
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.
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.
Hello IBM, I think this issue was resolved, if not please confirm. Thank You Joe Kachuck
------- 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.