linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Oza Pawandeep <poza@codeaurora.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>,
	Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>,
	Wei Zhang <wzhang@fb.com>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
	Timur Tabi <timur@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Address error and recovery for AER and DPC
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2018 12:12:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180102191218.GD24386@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180102190215.GC6211@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>

On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 01:02:15PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 12:54:15PM +0530, Oza Pawandeep wrote:
> > This patch set brings in support for DPC and AER to co-exist and not to
> > race for recovery.
> > 
> > The current implementation of AER and error message broadcasting to the
> > EP driver is tightly coupled and limited to AER service driver.
> > It is important to factor out broadcasting and other link handling
> > callbacks. So that not only when AER gets triggered, but also when DPC get
> > triggered, or both get triggered simultaneously (for e.g. ERR_FATAL),
> > callbacks are handled appropriately.
> > having modularized the code, the race between AER and DPC is handled
> > gracefully.
> > for e.g. when DPC is active and kicked in, AER should not attempt to do
> > recovery, because DPC takes care of it.
> 
> High-level question:
> 
> We have some convoluted code in negotiate_os_control() and
> aer_service_init() that (I think) essentially disables AER unless the
> platform firmware grants us permission to use it.
> 
> The last implementation note in PCIe r3.1, sec 6.2.10 says
> 
>   DPC may be controlled in some configurations by platform firmware
>   and in other configurations by the operating system. DPC
>   functionality is strongly linked with the functionality in Advanced
>   Error Reporting. To avoid conflicts over whether platform firmware
>   or the operating system have control of DPC, it is recommended that
>   platform firmware and operating systems always link the control of
>   DPC to the control of Advanced Error Reporting.
> 
> I read that as suggesting that we should enable DPC support in Linux
> if and only if we also enable AER.  But I don't see anything in DPC
> that looks like that.  Should there be something there?  Should DPC be
> restructured so it's enabled and handled inside the AER driver instead
> of being a separate driver?

Yes, I agree the two should be linked. I submitted a patch for that here,
though driver responsibilities are still separate in this series:

  https://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=151371742225111&w=2

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-01-02 19:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-29  7:24 [PATCH v2 0/4] Address error and recovery for AER and DPC Oza Pawandeep
2017-12-29  7:24 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI/AER: factor out error reporting from AER Oza Pawandeep
2017-12-29  7:24 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI/DPC/AER: Address Concurrency between AER and DPC Oza Pawandeep
2017-12-29 17:23   ` Keith Busch
2017-12-29 18:00     ` poza
2017-12-29 18:13       ` Keith Busch
2017-12-30  3:57         ` poza
2018-01-02 13:25     ` Sinan Kaya
2018-01-02 17:12       ` Keith Busch
2018-01-02 18:34         ` Sinan Kaya
2017-12-29  7:24 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] PCI/ERR: Do not do recovery if DPC service is active Oza Pawandeep
2017-12-29  7:24 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] PCI/DPC: Enumerate the devices after DPC trigger event Oza Pawandeep
2018-01-02 19:02 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] Address error and recovery for AER and DPC Bjorn Helgaas
2018-01-02 19:09   ` Sinan Kaya
2018-01-02 19:12   ` Keith Busch [this message]
2018-01-03  6:14   ` poza

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=20180102191218.GD24386@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liudongdong3@huawei.com \
    --cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
    --cc=poza@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=timur@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=wzhang@fb.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).