Linux-NVME Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ming.lei@redhat.com (Ming Lei)
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] nvme pci: try to allocate multiple irq vectors again in case of -EINVAL
Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2018 06:16:33 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181227221631.GA22073@ming.t460p> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181227130834.GA22967@lst.de>

On Thu, Dec 27, 2018@02:08:34PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2018@04:21:38PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018@07:20:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 26, 2018@06:37:55PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > It is observed on QEMU that pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity() may
> > > > returns -EINVAL when the requested number is too big(such as 64).
> > > 
> > > Which is not how this API is supposed to work and documented to work.
> > > 
> > > We need to fix pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity to not return a spurious
> > > error and just return the allocated number of vectors instead of
> > > hacking around that in drivers.
> > 
> > Yeah, you are right.
> > 
> > The issue is that QEMU nvme-pci is MSIX-capable only, and hasn't MSI
> > capability.
> > 
> > __pci_enable_msix_range() actually returns -ENOSPC, but __pci_enable_msi_range()
> > returns -EINVAL because dev->msi_cap is zero.
> > 
> > Maybe we need the following fix?
> 
> Should it matter?  We still get a negative vecs back, and still fall
> back to the next option.  Unless ther are no irqs available at all
> for the selected types pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity should never
> return an error.

The patch in last email does fix this issue.

In this case, the number of NVMe PCI's MSI-X table entries is 64, so
__pci_enable_msix_range() return -ENOSPC when we ask for 65.

However, the following __pci_enable_msi_range() returns -EINVAL because
the NVMe PCI isn't capable of MSI, then this error is returned from
pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity() finally to NVMe driver.

Of course, -EINVAL makes a difference because the current code only
tries to assign one irq vector in this case, and it shouldn't be
returned from pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity(), given there is enough
msix entries for fallback, right?

Thanks,
Ming

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-27 22:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-26 10:37 [PATCH 0/2] nvme pci: two fixes on nvme_setup_irqs Ming Lei
2018-12-26 10:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] nvme pci: fix nvme_setup_irqs() Ming Lei
2018-12-26 10:37 ` [PATCH 2/2] nvme pci: try to allocate multiple irq vectors again in case of -EINVAL Ming Lei
2018-12-26 18:20   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-12-27  8:21     ` Ming Lei
2018-12-27 13:08       ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-12-27 22:16         ` Ming Lei [this message]
2018-12-31 21:51         ` Bjorn Helgaas

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=20181227221631.GA22073@ming.t460p \
    --to=ming.lei@redhat.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