From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7854F194C6A for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 21:19:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738963183; cv=none; b=ILWU7dP3Rhr2zr7Gnz9AQrolqPSWFYS2XT9RYjqpuN9dxv7lHu+kdgXzTWhtAjHD5bKcWZQ8pcS9Q8Bdlh6gJQBoKfkdBWp8ZqSdqXcgFm6z8ArhG+vHfbiKoaAp1ClFQKvtsz+FzLXX92woAGoU1PhBOcZ5k2IoL8h8hjwv2LY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738963183; c=relaxed/simple; bh=EQ6JfKDSU+/vOUYStDh+fXccuVee+bZgtIgkdJHS3GY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RplHI36A3/fqwnDQRvXCKlyREShdKWm3wKUqaxARwFrT8FoGqFLNlVTO08hFUOKr35MJ9mMoQvQIc6sLSXO/Kd1gdPMM2RMGQ3B2Ivhu6IZJj80wtOstzDlVR6rr/xBsUSPuJmPJbDlO3pugQdnc6CI4oaasG6hk6I5EWDtT/WA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=AZHw4Hb9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="AZHw4Hb9" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1738963181; x=1770499181; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=EQ6JfKDSU+/vOUYStDh+fXccuVee+bZgtIgkdJHS3GY=; b=AZHw4Hb9OGxvmwO+AdNljhrDawYxlhyiDr+bftX1NOjRY8UKwfkAWGcP 9lfdbuK5ef3oPsX18DQwfuPt3fiFLZxTFL/fZmh5vhJjY4mruUPJG6HZh aZHr5Je2RLSWbOJQJgdnXsm2NMi+ntDqEwo7qca8UiLZcrfcBxvIA6+s4 P2oue+R0HttVi/UMPV87/HcyopQ+AzJslvtVS8eLxsaTuhRO/Oie2WmoR nPH8zK1BQTlWwwWZa6ToA89QFDv4wHqA39vSTVPZBL8p8smVwSTUSETEM 1MCUO+d+CpEeiVoI4LKRoFbIa4GALeL245Z2agIUkosTulaZvNr8TzDGh g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: kUzCUdu6So+Q1/MlqNFSjA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: nPvtq/9CS2qNgja7Z61axg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11338"; a="42458639" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,268,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="42458639" Received: from orviesa009.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.149]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Feb 2025 13:19:40 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: kd1SdDOzT3azqA+V9PgYLQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: r3NmmlHVSMyUEb039HJxRg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,268,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="111403911" Received: from aschofie-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO aschofie-mobl2.lan) ([10.125.111.82]) by orviesa009-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Feb 2025 13:19:40 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 13:19:38 -0800 From: Alison Schofield To: Dan Williams Cc: Davidlohr Bueso , Jonathan Cameron , Dave Jiang , Vishal Verma , Ira Weiny , linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] cxl/mbox: Check enabled_cmds before sending SET_SHUTDOWN_STATE Message-ID: References: <20250207193427.1711233-1-alison.schofield@intel.com> <67a667af363d5_2d2c29477@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <67a667af363d5_2d2c29477@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 12:06:07PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: > alison.schofield@ wrote: > > From: Alison Schofield > > > > The CXL specification defines CXL_MBOX_OP_SET_SHUTDOWN_STATE as > > optional. Check the enabled_cmds bitmap before sending to device. > > Table 8-126 defines it as mandatory for devices that support PMEM, see > the "PM" in the "Mailbox" column. > > > This appeared with cxl-test where mock support for this command > > is not present and -EIO is returned, leading to a WARN_ONCE() > > stack trace and dev_warn()'s on every cxl_nvdimm_probe. > > Davidlohr and I talked about this here: > > http://lore.kernel.org/679430b145dc0_20fa2947b@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch > > The plan was to follow up with mock device support... oh, that came in > on Tuesday, I need to go take a look at that: > > http://lore.kernel.org/20250205040842.1253616-1-dave@stgolabs.net Ah, I see it now. I saw the GPF patch in cxl/next and didn't want to dilly-dally! Should've dillied a bit. I'll try out your cxl-test patch David. --Alison > > > Signed-off-by: Alison Schofield > > --- > > > > Not sure what we actually want to do when not supported. > > Most cmds just return 0, like I did here, but maybe for > > this functionality something more is warranted. > > > > wrt cxl-test support, also not sure if this feature wants some > > round-trip testing support via cxl-test mocking. I do like the > > -EIO from cxl-test as a loud reminder when running cxl-test > > that something new has come in that cxl-test doesn't know about. > > Have a look at that follow-up series and see if it addresses the > concerns. >