All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 23:23:25 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1093476204.2170.55.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408250015420.17766@ppc970.osdl.org>


> The "good news" is that I doubt very many drivers will care enough to do
> this. I suspect you'll only have a few very specific drivers used in 
> fault-tolerant circumstances, where you care more about the errors than 
> about the inevitable serialization.

Yup, but then, the user have to take care that behind a single "error
checking" entity (a bridge for example), all devices have such drivers
that honor the bridge-level locking and not their own.

On ppc64, I think we always have 1 bridge = 1 slot though, makes things
easier (well, provided we don't start to try playing with error coming
from slots on the g5).

> > I don't know what is the best thing to do here... The arch is the one to
> > know what is the granularity of the error management (per slot ? per segment
> > or per domain ?) and so to know what kind of lock is needed...
> 
> It will have to depend on the bus setup. Not arch-specific per se, but 
> clearly specific to the bus controllers in question. 

Right.

Ben.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check)
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 09:23:25 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1093476204.2170.55.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408250015420.17766@ppc970.osdl.org>


> The "good news" is that I doubt very many drivers will care enough to do
> this. I suspect you'll only have a few very specific drivers used in 
> fault-tolerant circumstances, where you care more about the errors than 
> about the inevitable serialization.

Yup, but then, the user have to take care that behind a single "error
checking" entity (a bridge for example), all devices have such drivers
that honor the bridge-level locking and not their own.

On ppc64, I think we always have 1 bridge = 1 slot though, makes things
easier (well, provided we don't start to try playing with error coming
from slots on the g5).

> > I don't know what is the best thing to do here... The arch is the one to
> > know what is the granularity of the error management (per slot ? per segment
> > or per domain ?) and so to know what kind of lock is needed...
> 
> It will have to depend on the bus setup. Not arch-specific per se, but 
> clearly specific to the bus controllers in question. 

Right.

Ben.



  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-08-25 23:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-24  5:24 [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check) Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-24  5:24 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-24  5:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-24  5:41   ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-24  8:06   ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-24  8:06     ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-25  7:01   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-08-25  7:01     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-08-25  7:20     ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25  7:20       ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 15:52       ` Grant Grundler
2004-08-25 15:52         ` Grant Grundler
2004-08-25 17:25         ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 17:25           ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 23:23       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2004-08-25 23:23         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-08-25 23:35         ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 23:35           ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 15:42     ` Grant Grundler
2004-08-25 15:42       ` Grant Grundler
2004-08-28  1:23 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-28  1:23   ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:00   ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:00     ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:06   ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:06     ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-18  4:36     ` Grant Grundler
2004-09-18  4:36       ` Grant Grundler
2004-09-21  8:32       ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-21  8:32         ` Hidetoshi Seto

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1093476204.2170.55.camel@gaston \
    --to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.