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:

quoted

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 <redacted>
---
  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.