From: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
Mark Lord <kernel@start.ca>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] PCI/MSI: Introduce pci_auto_enable_msi*() family helpers
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2013 10:04:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131220090412.GA28367@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo66Jh-8sbQr13r1LknfKWMt1zBd9xhm46XpCcW-X_TqnA@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 02:37:22PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:58:47AM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> If rc == 13 and the device can only use 8, the extra 5 would be
> >> ignored and wasted.
> >>
> >> If the waste is unacceptable, the driver can try this:
> >>
> >> rc = pci_enable_msix_range(dev->pdev, dev->irqs, 16, 16);
> >> if (rc < 0) {
> >> rc = pci_enable_msix_range(dev->pdev, dev->irqs, 8, 8);
> >> if (rc < 0) {
> >> rc = pci_enable_msix_range(dev->pdev, dev->irqs, 4, 4);
> >> ...
> >> }
> >
> > I have troubles with this fallback logic. On each failed step we get an
> > error and we do not know if this is indeed an error or an indication of
> > insufficient MSI resources. Even -ENOSPC would not tell much, since it
> > could be thrown from a lower level.
> >
> > By contrast, with the tri-state return value we can distinguish and bail
> > out on errors right away.
>
> I thought the main point of this was to get rid of interfaces that
> were prone to misuse, and tri-state return values was a big part of
> that. All we really care about in the driver is success/failure. I'm
> not sure there's much to be gained by analyzing *why* we failed, and I
> think it tends to make uncommon error paths more complicated than
> necessary. If we fail four times instead of bailing out after the
> first failure, well, that doesn't sound terrible to me. The last
> failure can log the errno, which is enough for debugging.
Sure, the main point is to get rid of try-state interfaces. I just afraid
to throw out the baby with the bath water for unusual devices (which we do
not have in the tree).
I can only identify two downsides of the approach above - (a) repeated error
logging in a platform code (i.e. caused by -ENOMEM) and (b) repeated attempts
to enable MSI when the platform already reported a fatal error.
I think if a device needs an extra magic to enable MSI (i.e. writing to
specific registers etc.) it would be manageable with pci_enable_msix_range(),
but may be I am missing something?
So my thought is may be we deprecate the tri-state interfaces, but do not
do it immediately.
--
Regards,
Alexander Gordeev
agordeev@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-20 9:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-16 8:34 [PATCH v4 0/9] PCI/MSI: Introduce pci_auto_enable_msi*() family helpers Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] PCI/MSI/s390: Fix single MSI only check Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] PCI/MSI/s390: Remove superfluous check of MSI type Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] PCI/MSI: Fix return value when populate_msi_sysfs() failed Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] PCI/MSI: Return -ENOSYS for unimplemented interfaces, not -1 Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] PCI/MSI: Make pci_enable_msi/msix() 'nvec' argument type as int Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:34 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] PCI/MSI: Factor out pci_get_msi_vec_count() interface Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-18 0:33 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-12-16 8:35 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] PCI/MSI: Get rid of pci_enable_msi_block_auto() interface Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:35 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] PCI/MSI: Introduce pci_get_msix_vec_count() interface Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-16 8:35 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] PCI/MSI: Introduce pci_auto_enable_msi*() family helpers Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-18 0:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-12-18 13:23 ` Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-18 18:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-12-19 13:42 ` Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-19 13:47 ` Tejun Heo
2013-12-19 21:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-12-20 9:04 ` Alexander Gordeev [this message]
2013-12-20 13:28 ` Tejun Heo
2013-12-20 10:28 ` Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-23 14:44 ` Alexander Gordeev
2013-12-23 17:19 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-12-19 22:30 ` [PATCH v4 0/9] " 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=20131220090412.GA28367@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com \
--to=agordeev@redhat.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kernel@start.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).