Linux Documentation
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>
To: <mhonap@nvidia.com>
Cc: <jgg@ziepe.ca>, <ankita@nvidia.com>, <jic23@kernel.org>,
	<dave.jiang@intel.com>, <alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com>,
	<smadhavan@nvidia.com>, <corbet@lwn.net>,
	<skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	<alison.schofield@intel.com>, <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	<iweiny@kernel.org>, <ming.li@zohomail.com>, <yishaih@nvidia.com>,
	<skolothumtho@nvidia.com>, <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	<bhelgaas@google.com>, <dmatlack@google.com>, <kees@kernel.org>,
	<gustavoars@kernel.org>, <cjia@nvidia.com>, <kjaju@nvidia.com>,
	<vsethi@nvidia.com>, <zhiw@nvidia.com>,
	<linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>,
	alex@shazbot.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/27] cxl: Establish media readiness in cxl_mem_probe()
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2026 16:18:39 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260825161839.2cb3a6c7@shazbot.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260813093631.2288172-5-mhonap@nvidia.com>

On Thu, 13 Aug 2026 15:06:08 +0530
<mhonap@nvidia.com> wrote:

> From: Manish Honap <mhonap@nvidia.com>
> 
> media_ready was only ever set by cxl_pci, in advance of registering a
> memdev and with CXL Memory Device register assumptions. A consumer that
> creates a memdev without cxl_pci, such as a mailbox-less Type-2
> accelerator brought up through devm_cxl_probe_mem(), therefore handed
> cxl_mem a device with media_ready still false, and cxl_mem_probe()
> rejected it with -EBUSY. __devm_cxl_add_memdev() turns that into -ENXIO
> back to the caller and the bind fails.
> 
> Move the readiness wait into cxl_mem_probe() so every memdev consumer
> gets a ready resource regardless of how the memdev was created. When
> media_ready is not already set, wait on the device's DVSEC
> Mem_Info_Valid and Mem_Active bits and mark it ready. cxl_pci keeps
> setting media_ready before it registers its memdev, so that path skips
> the wait.
> 
> The CXL Memory Device register group is optional and many Type-2 devices
> do not implement it, so cxl_await_media_ready() must not read the Memdev
> Status register unless the group is mapped. Reading regs.memdev on a
> device that lacks it would fault. Gate that read on regs.memdev; the
> DVSEC bits already prove readiness for such devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Manish Honap <mhonap@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/cxl/core/pci.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>  drivers/cxl/mem.c      |  9 +++++++--
>  2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> index 08d4c955137d..9b372d5a1aa4 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> @@ -151,7 +151,6 @@ int cxl_await_media_ready(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(cxlds->dev);
>  	int d = cxlds->cxl_dvsec;
>  	int rc, i, hdm_count;
> -	u64 md_status;
>  	u16 cap;
>  
>  	rc = pci_read_config_word(pdev,
> @@ -172,9 +171,17 @@ int cxl_await_media_ready(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
>  			return rc;
>  	}
>  
> -	md_status = readq(cxlds->regs.memdev + CXLMDEV_STATUS_OFFSET);
> -	if (!CXLMDEV_READY(md_status))
> -		return -EIO;
> +	/*
> +	 * It is possible some Type-2 devices (CXL_DEVTYPE_DEVMEM) do not
> +	 * implement regs.memdev; only consult the Memdev Status register when
> +	 * the group is actually present.
> +	 */
> +	if (cxlds->regs.memdev) {
> +		u64 md_status = readq(cxlds->regs.memdev + CXLMDEV_STATUS_OFFSET);
> +
> +		if (!CXLMDEV_READY(md_status))
> +			return -EIO;
> +	}
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }

This looks like it should be two separate patches.  The change below
depends on the above, but the above change stands on its own.

> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/mem.c b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> index 798e5c369cfc..9c6e99b9124c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
> @@ -105,8 +105,13 @@ static int cxl_mem_probe(struct device *dev)
>  	struct dentry *dentry;
>  	int rc;
>  
> -	if (!cxlds->media_ready)
> -		return -EBUSY;
> +	if (!cxlds->media_ready) {
> +		rc = cxl_await_media_ready(cxlds);
> +		if (rc)
> +			return rc;
> +		cxlds->media_ready = true;
> +		dev_dbg(dev, "CXL media ready\n");
> +	}
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Someone is trying to reattach this device after it lost its port

LLM review is noting a plausible behavioral change here; if there is an
actual media issue, it seems it's flagged in cxl_pci_probe() by leaving
cxlds.media_ready false.  That path can then go on to find memory
devices, add a CXL_DEVICE_MEMORY_EXPANDER, and via the .probe callback
reach cxl_mem_probe() and wait another timeout delay here for the same
media issue.

Should the mailbox-less path test and set media_ready before adding the
CXL_DEVICE_MEMORY_EXPANDER and getting to this .probe callback, making
it consistently tested upstream of this function?  Thanks,

Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-25 22:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-13  9:36 [PATCH v4 00/27] vfio/pci: Add CXL Type-2 device passthrough support mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 01/27] cxl: Fix resource.c include path and export cxl_restore_hdm_after_pci_reset mhonap
2026-08-21 22:52   ` Jonathan Cameron
2026-08-22  1:22     ` Manish Honap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 02/27] cxl/regs: Skip sub-block region request for BAR-owning drivers mhonap
2026-08-25 21:26   ` Alex Williamson
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 03/27] cxl: Move component register defines to uapi/cxl/cxl_regs.h mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 04/27] cxl: Establish media readiness in cxl_mem_probe() mhonap
2026-08-25 22:18   ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 05/27] cxl: Add a function-scoped reset entry for vfio-pci mhonap
2026-08-25 23:11   ` Alex Williamson
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 06/27] vfio/pci: Add CXL ops registration interface mhonap
2026-08-26 21:11   ` Alex Williamson
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 07/27] vfio/pci: Detect CXL devices and load vfio-cxl on demand mhonap
2026-08-26 22:17   ` Alex Williamson
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 08/27] vfio/cxl: Add the vfio-cxl module skeleton mhonap
2026-08-26 22:50   ` Alex Williamson
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 09/27] vfio/cxl: Create the CXL memory device at bind mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 10/27] vfio/cxl: Reject unsupported decoder topologies " mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 11/27] vfio/cxl: Own the whole component register BAR mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 12/27] vfio/pci: Let a provider exclude a BAR sub-range from mmap mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 13/27] vfio/pci: Refuse read/write to an excluded BAR sub-range mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 14/27] vfio: Add CXL region type for the HDM region mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 15/27] vfio/pci: Call CXL open and close hooks around device use mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 16/27] vfio/cxl: Shadow the CXL DVSEC body at open mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 17/27] vfio/cxl: Virtualize the CXL DVSEC mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 18/27] vfio/cxl: Expose the HDM memory and trap the decoder registers mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 19/27] vfio/cxl: Keep the HDM decoder block off the direct BAR mapping mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 20/27] vfio/cxl: Emulate the HDM decoder commit handshake mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 21/27] vfio/cxl: Describe the CXL device and decoder geometry to userspace mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 22/27] vfio/cxl: Revoke the HDM mapping on reset and power transitions mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 23/27] vfio/cxl: Refresh the decoder snapshot after a device reset mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 24/27] vfio/cxl: Service a guest-triggered CXL reset mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 25/27] vfio/pci: Provide an opt-out for the CXL Type-2 extensions mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 26/27] Documentation: vfio-pci: Document CXL Type-2 device passthrough mhonap
2026-08-13  9:36 ` [PATCH v4 27/27] selftests/vfio: Add CXL Type-2 passthrough corner-case tests mhonap
2026-08-26  7:28   ` Shuai Xue
2026-08-26 16:17     ` Manish Honap

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=20260825161839.2cb3a6c7@shazbot.org \
    --to=alex@shazbot.org \
    --cc=alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=ankita@nvidia.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=cjia@nvidia.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
    --cc=iweiny@kernel.org \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kjaju@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhonap@nvidia.com \
    --cc=ming.li@zohomail.com \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=skolothumtho@nvidia.com \
    --cc=smadhavan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
    --cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=yishaih@nvidia.com \
    --cc=zhiw@nvidia.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox