On 3/24/2017 10:55 PM, Corey Minyard wrote:
> Why would a timeout for a message be expected? The BMC should
> at least respond with an error for an incorrect message.
Let me add some more context...
In this particular case, the FRU ID that I was trying to access was
correct.
Platform supports PCIe hotplug. The FRU is embedded into the HW that
is being removed. That's what I mean by non-existent.
When the device is ejected and a FRU command is executed, BMC times out
reaching to the FRU on the device.
When the device is inserted, everything works as expected.
>
> -corey
>
> On 03/23/2017 10:32 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>> Getting timeout message from BMC when trying to read from a non-existent
>> FRU. This is expected but warning is not.
>>
>> Let's reduce the warning to debug.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <ok...@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c | 3 +--
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
>> index 747c2ba..1b64419 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_ipmi.c
>> @@ -429,8 +429,7 @@ static void ipmi_msg_handler(struct ipmi_recv_msg *msg,
>> void *user_msg_data)
>> if (msg->recv_type == IPMI_RESPONSE_RECV_TYPE &&
>> msg->msg.data_len == 1) {
>> if (msg->msg.data[0] == IPMI_TIMEOUT_COMPLETION_CODE) {
>> - dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, true,
>> - "Unexpected response (timeout).\n");
>> + dev_dbg_once(dev, "Unexpected response (timeout).\n");
>> tx_msg->msg_done = ACPI_IPMI_TIMEOUT;
>> }
>> goto out_comp;
>
>
>
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
Foundation Collaborative Project.
