Re: [PATCH v3 05/15] PCI/AER: Add CXL PCIe port correctable error support in AER service driver

["Bowman, Terry" <terry.bowman@amd.com>]

Hi Lukas,

I added comments below.

On 11/14/2024 10:44 AM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 03:54:19PM -0600, Terry Bowman wrote:
>> @@ -1115,8 +1131,11 @@ static void pci_aer_handle_error(struct pci_dev *dev, struct aer_err_info *info)
>>  
>>  static void handle_error_source(struct pci_dev *dev, struct aer_err_info *info)
>>  {
>> -	cxl_handle_error(dev, info);
>> -	pci_aer_handle_error(dev, info);
>> +	if (is_internal_error(info) && handles_cxl_errors(dev))
>> +		cxl_handle_error(dev, info);
>> +	else
>> +		pci_aer_handle_error(dev, info);
>> +
>>  	pci_dev_put(dev);
>>  }
> If you just do this at the top of cxl_handle_error()...
>
> 	if (!is_internal_error(info))
> 		return;
>
> ...you avoid the need to move is_internal_error() around and the
> patch becomes simpler and easier to review.

If is_internal_error()==0, then pci_aer_handle_error() should be called to process the PCIe error. Your suggestion would require returning a value from cxl_handle_error(). And then more "if" logic would be required for the cxl_handle_error() return value. Should both is_internal_error() and handles_cxl_errors()be moved into cxl_handle_error()? Would give this:

 static void handle_error_source(struct pci_dev *dev, struct aer_err_info *info)
 {
-	cxl_handle_error(dev, info);
-	pci_aer_handle_error(dev, info);
+	if (!cxl_handle_error(dev, info))
+		pci_aer_handle_error(dev, info);
+
 	pci_dev_put(dev);
 }

>
>> The AER service driver supports handling downstream port protocol errors in
>> restricted CXL host (RCH) mode also known as CXL1.1. It needs the same
>> functionality for CXL PCIe ports operating in virtual hierarchy (VH)
>> mode.[1]
> This is somewhat minor but by convention, patches in the PCI subsystem
> adhere to spec language and capitalization, e.g. "Downstream Port"
> instead of "downstream port".  Makes it easier to connect the commit
> message or code comments to the spec.  So maybe you want to consider
> that if/when respinning.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lukas
Thanks for pointing that out. I'll update as you suggest.

Regards,
Terry