From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com>
Cc: "Patel, Mayurkumar" <mayurkumar.patel@intel.com>,
"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com"
<mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
"Busch, Keith" <keith.busch@intel.com>,
"Tarazona-Duarte,
Luis Antonio" <luis.antonio.tarazona-duarte@intel.com>,
Rajat Jain <rajatxjain@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] PCI: pciehp: Fix presence detect change interrupt handling
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:14:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160817181459.GB27353@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACK8Z6H2G1cA6W+7timaKdeK2wuPNQfdLeZQCx=C8VkBESUOfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Rajat, thanks for chiming in!
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:54:12AM -0700, Rajat Jain wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 10:12 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mayurkumar,
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 01:42:18PM +0000, Patel, Mayurkumar wrote:
> > > Currently, if very fast hotplug removal and insertion event comes
> > > as following
> > >
> > > [ 608.823412] pciehp 0000:00:1c.1:pcie04: Card not present on Slot(1)
> > > [ 608.835249] pciehp 0000:00:1c.1:pcie04: Card present on Slot(1)
> > >
> > > In this case following scenario happens,
> > >
> > > While removal:
> > > pcie_isr() -> pciehp_queue_interrupt_event() -> triggers queue_work().
> > > work invokes interrupt_event_handler() -> case INT_PRESENCE_OFF
> > > and calls handle_surprise_event().
> > >
> > > handle_surprise_event() again calls pciehp_get_adapter_status()
> > > and reads slot status which might have been changed
> > > already due to PCI_EXP_SLTSTA_PDC event for hotplug insertion
> > > has happened. So it queues, ENABLE_REQ for both removal
> > > and insertion interrupt based on latest slot status.
> > >
> > > In this case, PCIe device can not be hot-add again because
> > > it was never removed due to which device can not get enabled.
> > >
> > > handle_surprise_event() can be removed and pciehp_queue_power_work()
> > > can be directly triggered based on INT_PRESENCE_ON and INT_PRESENCE_OFF
> > > from the switch case exist in interrupt_event_hanlder().
> > >
> > > The patch ensures the pciehp_queue_power_work() processes
> > > presence detect change for removal and insertion correctly.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Mayurkumar Patel <mayurkumar.patel@intel.com>
>
> Acked-by: Rajat Jain <rajatxjain@gmail.com>
>
> >
> > > ---
> > > Resending the patch addressing to PCI Maintainer Bjorn Helgaas.
> > >
> > > drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c | 18 ++----------------
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c
> > > index 880978b..87c5bea 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_ctrl.c
> > > @@ -301,20 +301,6 @@ static void handle_button_press_event(struct slot *p_slot)
> > > /*
> > > * Note: This function must be called with slot->lock held
> > > */
> > > -static void handle_surprise_event(struct slot *p_slot)
> > > -{
> > > - u8 getstatus;
> > > -
> > > - pciehp_get_adapter_status(p_slot, &getstatus);
> > > - if (!getstatus)
> > > - pciehp_queue_power_work(p_slot, DISABLE_REQ);
> > > - else
> > > - pciehp_queue_power_work(p_slot, ENABLE_REQ);
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > -/*
> > > - * Note: This function must be called with slot->lock held
> > > - */
> > > static void handle_link_event(struct slot *p_slot, u32 event)
> > > {
> > > struct controller *ctrl = p_slot->ctrl;
> > > @@ -377,14 +363,14 @@ static void interrupt_event_handler(struct work_struct *work)
> > > pciehp_green_led_off(p_slot);
> > > break;
> > > case INT_PRESENCE_ON:
> > > - handle_surprise_event(p_slot);
> > > + pciehp_queue_power_work(p_slot, ENABLE_REQ);
> > > break;
> > > case INT_PRESENCE_OFF:
> > > /*
> > > * Regardless of surprise capability, we need to
> > > * definitely remove a card that has been pulled out!
> > > */
> > > - handle_surprise_event(p_slot);
> > > + pciehp_queue_power_work(p_slot, DISABLE_REQ);
> > > break;
> > > case INT_LINK_UP:
> > > case INT_LINK_DOWN:
> >
> > Thanks a lot for this. I think other people have seen the same issue.
> >
> > Even with this fix, don't we have essentially the same problem one
> > layer back? The first thing pcie_isr() does is read PCI_EXP_SLTSTA,
> > then few lines down, we call pciehp_get_adapter_status(), which reads
> > PCI_EXP_SLTSTA *again*. So I think the window is smaller but still
> > there.
> >
> > I think what we really should do is read the status registers
> > (PCI_EXP_SLTSTA and probably also PCI_EXP_LNKSTA) *once* in
> > pcie_isr(), before we write PCI_EXP_SLTSTA to clear the RW1C bits
> > there, and then queue up events based on those values, without
> > re-reading the registers.
> >
> > What do you think?
>
>
> Yes, I agree. We need to do something about that *in addition * to the
> above patch to cover the
> whole story. However I think there still will be a room for some
> interrupt misses because we are
> collecting the interrupts in intr_loc, and theoretically we could be
> in a situation where in the pcie_isr, the
>
> do {
> ...
> } while(detected)
>
> loop gets a removal->insertion->removal all while in the same
> invocation of pcie_isr().
> If this happens, the intr_loc will have recorded a single insertion
> and a single removal, and
> the final result will depend on the order in which we decide to
> process the events in intr_loc.
I don't quite understand how that "do { .. } while (detected)" loop
works or why it's done that way. Collecting interrupt status bits in
an ISR is obviously a very common task; it seems like there should be
a standard, idiomatic way of doing it, but I don't know it.
> Or, may be we can make the calls to pciehp_queue_interrupt_event()
> before clearing the
> RW1C in the slot status register (in the loop)?
Yeah, it seems like we should read PCI_EXP_SLTSTA once, queue up any
events related to it, then clear the relevant SLTSTA bits.
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-17 13:42 [PATCH v1] PCI: pciehp: Fix presence detect change interrupt handling Patel, Mayurkumar
2016-08-17 17:12 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-08-17 17:54 ` Rajat Jain
2016-08-17 18:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-08-17 22:37 ` Patel, Mayurkumar
2016-08-18 12:52 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-08-18 20:59 ` Patel, Mayurkumar
2016-08-23 23:47 ` Rajat Jain
2016-08-24 9:00 ` Patel, Mayurkumar
2016-09-01 10:44 ` Patel, Mayurkumar
2016-08-24 14:59 ` Keith Busch
2016-08-18 21:07 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] " Mayurkumar Patel
2016-08-18 21:07 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] PCI: pciehp: Rework hotplug interrupt routine Mayurkumar Patel
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=20160817181459.GB27353@localhost \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luis.antonio.tarazona-duarte@intel.com \
--cc=mayurkumar.patel@intel.com \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rajatja@google.com \
--cc=rajatxjain@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).