From: Graham Whyte <grwhyte@linux.microsoft.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, shyamsaini@linux.microsoft.com,
code@tyhicks.com, Okaya@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] PCI: Reduce FLR delay to 10ms for MSFT devices
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:42:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2dfbbd15-c03a-45b6-99a6-fa36772676bc@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250616210530.GA1106466@bhelgaas>
On 6/16/2025 2:05 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 12:02:41PM -0700, Graham Whyte wrote:
>> On 6/13/2025 8:33 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 09:41:45AM -0700, Graham Whyte wrote:
>>>> On 6/11/2025 11:31 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 01:08:21PM -0700, Graham Whyte wrote:
>>>>>> We can ask our HW engineers to implement function readiness but we need
>>>>>> to be able to support exiting products, hence why posting it as a quirk.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your report sounds like it works perfectly fine, it's just that you
>>>>> want to reduce the delay. For that you'll need to stick to the standard
>>>>> methods instead of adding quirks, which are for buggy hardware that does
>>>>> not otherwise work.
>>>>
>>>> Bjorn, what would you recommend as next steps here?
>>>
>>> This is a tough call and I don't pretend to have an obvious answer. I
>>> understand the desire to improve performance. On the other hand, PCI
>>> has been successful over the long term because devices adhere to
>>> standardized ways of doing things, which makes generic software
>>> possible. Quirks degrade that story, of course, especially when there
>>> is an existing standardized solution that isn't being used. I'm not
>>> at all happy about vendors that decide against the standard solution
>>> and then ask OS folks to do extra work to compensate.
>>
>> Should someone want to implement readiness time reporting down the road,
>> they'll need to do the same work as patch 1 in this series (making the
>> flr delay a configurable parameter).
>
> Sure. That's a trivial change. The problem is the quirk itself.
>
> The Readiness Time Reporting Extended Capability is read-only with no
> control bits in it so it requires no actual logic in the device.
> Maybe you can just implement that capability with a firmware change on
> the device and add the corresponding Linux support for it.
Hi Bjorn,
We checked with our HW folks, it's not possible for us to update the pci
register components with this particular card, they are read only. What
are your thoughts on the sysfs approach mentioned in the previous email?
Thanks,
Graham
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-18 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-11 0:05 [PATCH v3 0/2] PCI: Reduce FLR delay to 10ms for MSFT devices grwhyte
2025-06-11 0:05 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: Add flr_delay parameter to pci_dev struct grwhyte
2025-06-13 10:23 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-08-06 22:06 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-11 0:05 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] PCI: Reduce FLR delay to 10ms for MSFT devices grwhyte
2025-06-13 10:31 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-06-11 3:27 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] " Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-11 7:23 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-06-11 20:08 ` Graham Whyte
2025-06-12 6:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2025-06-12 16:41 ` Graham Whyte
2025-06-13 15:33 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-16 19:02 ` Graham Whyte
2025-06-16 21:05 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-18 16:42 ` Graham Whyte [this message]
2025-07-02 17:03 ` Graham Whyte
2025-06-13 11:42 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-06-13 13:45 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-06-13 13:56 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
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=2dfbbd15-c03a-45b6-99a6-fa36772676bc@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=grwhyte@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=Okaya@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=code@tyhicks.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shyamsaini@linux.microsoft.com \
/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.