From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 35869C61DD9 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2026 14:00:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8307D10E0A9; Sat, 29 Aug 2026 14:00:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: gabe.freedesktop.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="MREFx4nD"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.19]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E944510E0A9 for ; Sat, 29 Aug 2026 14:00:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1788012038; x=1819548038; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=xZnSMSWNXfhyMX7VWps+6XmYlFTvby85ycQhwhhAS+w=; b=MREFx4nD5Q0wSOvvl1fvsywZn74nJPC18xU5bBlc2CpGdsr3FxSF6D30 noinBRhGYBUUMh67TMx7kgvLdLSt6K34RqVcsPZLOjvd2iSOi35bHGIo1 32WGDpukXyvkZ3WHc17K6CbklqYpsxXfq94dtkz5VSTgCb7oKMAZdters irQX8YI2oMzFeMKKH7H1/9k427eqM+J0AlTjuiKqTtMCaAERjZIvFCCXw +fNJnT910CRYyIxAfvWoTkuqCDYKy4G/7RfnK80eG+GyrlVcXyV1bh3s+ +sno3GgPJ1FdSVgMYb1dY+n1+58m/g5In9uR4cbb06VJs/oYJ5YKFOuhd Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: v/Ysr9i9TnGGXfY+eSN36g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: p9j8j9X5TbaVYAxagke7dQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11889"; a="88418553" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,250,1779174000"; d="scan'208";a="88418553" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by orvoesa111.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Aug 2026 07:00:37 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: sHhNx81YRXC4eDrxmGAfuQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: DTiAaG/pTXCxjEi7BImh1A== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,250,1779174000"; d="scan'208";a="268443779" Received: from black.igk.intel.com ([10.91.253.5]) by orviesa007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Aug 2026 07:00:35 -0700 Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2026 16:00:32 +0200 From: Raag Jadav To: "Gupta, Anshuman" Cc: "Tauro, Riana" , "intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org" , "Vivi, Rodrigo" , "aravind.iddamsetty@linux.intel.com" , "Koppuravuri, Ravi Kishore" , "Roper, Matthew D" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/xe_pci_error: Wait for pcode init post SBR Message-ID: References: <20260828113104.319843-4-riana.tauro@intel.com> <20260828113104.319843-5-riana.tauro@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Xe graphics driver List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-xe-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-xe" On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 07:36:21PM +0530, Gupta, Anshuman wrote: > From: Tauro, Riana ... > > @@ -109,6 +110,10 @@ static pci_ers_result_t > > xe_pci_error_slot_reset(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > return PCI_ERS_RESULT_DISCONNECT; > > } > > > > + err = xe_pcode_probe_early(xe); > This can be a 3-minute wait in worst case, after PCIe core pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus() is already waited for 1 second*[1]. > What will be the impact on already running workload and any worker thread tries to access the mmio or PCIe bar here? I think a more important question is, should we even get a callback if SGUnit isn't ready yet and what PCI spec says about this? Raag > [1] > /* > * Devices may extend the 1 sec period through Request Retry Status > * completions (PCIe r6.0 sec 2.3.1). The spec does not provide an upper > * limit, but 60 sec ought to be enough for any device to become > * responsive. > */ > #define PCIE_RESET_READY_POLL_MS 60000 /* msec */