From: Zijun Hu <zijun_hu@icloud.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Timur Tabi <timur@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] cxl/region: Find free cxl decoder by device_for_each_child()
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 19:46:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e7e6ea66-bcfe-4af4-9f82-ae39fef1a976@icloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66dfc7d4f11a3_32646294f7@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
On 2024/9/10 12:15, Dan Williams wrote:
> quic_zijuhu wrote:
>> On 9/10/2024 8:45 AM, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> Ira Weiny wrote:
>>> [..]
>>>>> This still feels more complex that I think it should be. Why not just
>>>>> modify the needed device information after the device is found? What
>>>>> exactly is being changed in the match_free_decoder that needs to keep
>>>>> "state"? This feels odd.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed it is odd.
>>>>
>>>> How about adding?
>>>
>>> I would prefer just dropping usage of device_find_ or device_for_each_
>>> with storing an array decoders in the port directly. The port already
>>> has arrays for dports , endpoints, and regions. Using the "device" APIs
>>> to iterate children was a bit lazy, and if the id is used as the array
>>> key then a direct lookup makes some cases simpler.
>>
>> it seems Ira and Dan have corrected original logic to ensure
>> that all child decoders are sorted by ID in ascending order as shown
>> by below link.
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/66df666ded3f7_3c80f229439@iweiny-mobl.notmuch/
>>
>> based on above correction, as shown by my another exclusive fix
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240905-fix_cxld-v2-1-51a520a709e4@quicinc.com/
>> there are a very simple change to solve the remaining original concern
>> that device_find_child() modifies caller's match data.
>>
>> here is the simple change.
>>
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>> @@ -797,23 +797,13 @@ static size_t show_targetN(struct cxl_region
>> *cxlr, char *buf, int pos)
>> static int match_free_decoder(struct device *dev, void *data)
>> {
>> struct cxl_decoder *cxld;
>> - int *id = data;
>>
>> if (!is_switch_decoder(dev))
>> return 0;
>>
>> cxld = to_cxl_decoder(dev);
>>
>> - /* enforce ordered allocation */
>> - if (cxld->id != *id)
>> - return 0;
>> -
>> - if (!cxld->region)
>> - return 1;
>> -
>> - (*id)++;
>> -
>> - return 0;
>> + return cxld->region ? 0 : 1;
>
> So I wanted to write a comment here to stop the next person from
> tripping over this dependency on decoder 'add' order, but there is a
> problem. For this simple version to work it needs 3 things:
>
> 1/ decoders are added in hardware id order: done,
> devm_cxl_enumerate_decoders() handles that
>
do not known how you achieve it, perhaps, it is not simpler than
my below solution:
finding a free switch cxl decoder with minimal ID
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240905-fix_cxld-v2-1-51a520a709e4@quicinc.com/
which has simple logic and also does not have any limitation related
to add/allocate/de-allocate a decoder.
i am curious why not to consider this solution ?
> 2/ search for decoders in their added order: done, device_find_child()
> guarantees this, although it is not obvious without reading the internals
> of device_add().
>
> 3/ regions are de-allocated from decoders in reverse decoder id order.
> This is not enforced, in fact it is impossible to enforce. Consider that
> any memory device can be removed at any time and may not be removed in
> the order in which the device allocated switch decoders in the topology.
>
sorry, don't understand, could you take a example ?
IMO, the simple change in question will always get a free decoder with
the minimal ID once 1/ is ensured regardless of de-allocation approach.
> So, that existing comment of needing to enforce ordered allocation is
> still relevant even though the implementation fails to handle the
> out-of-order region deallocation problem.
>
> I alluded to the need for a "tear down the world" implementation back in
> 2022 [1], but never got around to finishing that.
>
> Now, the cxl_port.hdm_end attribute tracks the "last" decoder to be
> allocated for endpoint ports. That same tracking needs to be added for
> switch ports, then this routine could check for ordering constraints by:
>
> /* enforce hardware ordered allocation */
> if (!cxld->region && port->hdm_end + 1 == cxld->id)
> return 1;
> return 0;
>
> As it stands now @hdm_end is never updated for switch ports.
>
> [1]: 176baefb2eb5 cxl/hdm: Commit decoder state to hardware
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes, that looks simple enough for now, although lets not use a ternary
> condition and lets leave a comment for the next person:
>
> /* decoders are added in hardware id order
> * (devm_cxl_enumerate_decoders), allocated to regions in id order
> * (device_find_child() walks children in 'add' order)
> */
>> }
>>
>> static int match_auto_decoder(struct device *dev, void *data)
>> @@ -840,7 +830,6 @@ cxl_region_find_decoder(struct cxl_port *port,
>> struct cxl_region *cxlr)
>> {
>> struct device *dev;
>> - int id = 0;
>>
>> if (port == cxled_to_port(cxled))
>> return &cxled->cxld;
>> @@ -849,7 +838,7 @@ cxl_region_find_decoder(struct cxl_port *port,
>> dev = device_find_child(&port->dev, &cxlr->params,
>> match_auto_decoder);
>> else
>> - dev = device_find_child(&port->dev, &id,
>> match_free_decoder);
>> + dev = device_find_child(&port->dev, NULL,
>> match_free_decoder);
>> if (!dev)
>> return NULL;
>>
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-10 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-05 0:36 [PATCH v4 0/2] driver core: Prevent device_find_child() from modifying caller's match data Zijun Hu
2024-09-05 0:36 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] cxl/region: Find free cxl decoder by device_for_each_child() Zijun Hu
2024-09-05 5:32 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-09-05 8:48 ` quic_zijuhu
2024-09-05 11:18 ` Zijun Hu
2024-09-09 19:56 ` Ira Weiny
2024-09-10 0:45 ` Dan Williams
2024-09-10 3:17 ` quic_zijuhu
2024-09-10 4:15 ` Dan Williams
2024-09-10 4:20 ` Dan Williams
2024-09-10 11:46 ` Zijun Hu [this message]
2024-09-10 16:01 ` Dan Williams
2024-09-10 18:27 ` Dan Williams
2024-09-11 12:14 ` Zijun Hu
2024-10-10 13:47 ` Zijun Hu
2024-09-11 11:52 ` Zijun Hu
2024-09-05 0:36 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] net: qcom/emac: Find sgmii_ops " Zijun Hu
2024-09-05 5:29 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-09-05 5:33 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2024-09-05 9:09 ` quic_zijuhu
2024-09-06 0:29 ` Zijun Hu
2024-09-05 8:29 ` quic_zijuhu
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=e7e6ea66-bcfe-4af4-9f82-ae39fef1a976@icloud.com \
--to=zijun_hu@icloud.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=quic_zijuhu@quicinc.com \
--cc=timur@kernel.org \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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.