From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI/portdrv: Do not require an interrupt for all AER capable ports
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 11:07:12 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221209170712.GA1627846@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221207084105.84947-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 10:41:05AM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> Only Root Ports and Event Collectors use MSI for AER. PCIe Switch ports
> or endpoints on the other hand only send messages (that get collected by
> the former). For this reason do not require PCIe switch ports and
> endpoints to use interrupt if they support AER.
>
> This allows portdrv to attach PCIe switch ports of Intel DG1 and DG2
> discrete graphics cards. These do not declare MSI or legacy interrupts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Thanks for the additional info! This seems like something we should
definitely do.
I'm wondering whether we should check for this in
get_port_device_capability(). It already has similar checks for
device type for other services. This would skip pci_set_master() for
these non-RP, non-RCEC devices, which is probably harmless, since I
assume we only need that to make sure MSI works.
It would also prevent allocation of the AER service for non-RP,
non-RCEC devices. That's also probably harmless, since aer_probe()
ignores those devices anyway.
What do you think of something like this? (This is based on my
pci/portdrv branch which squashed everything into portdrv.c:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/log/?h=pci/portdrv)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c
index a6c4225505d5..8b16e96ec15c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv.c
@@ -232,7 +232,9 @@ static int get_port_device_capability(struct pci_dev *dev)
}
#ifdef CONFIG_PCIEAER
- if (dev->aer_cap && pci_aer_available() &&
+ if ((pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT ||
+ pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) &&
+ dev->aer_cap && pci_aer_available() &&
(pcie_ports_native || host->native_aer))
services |= PCIE_PORT_SERVICE_AER;
#endif
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-09 17:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-07 8:41 [PATCH v2] PCI/portdrv: Do not require an interrupt for all AER capable ports Mika Westerberg
2022-12-07 14:31 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
2022-12-07 22:35 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-12-08 5:58 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-12-08 12:23 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-12-08 13:58 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-12-08 14:12 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-12-09 17:07 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2022-12-09 21:04 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
2022-12-09 21:48 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-12-09 22:13 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
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=20221209170712.GA1627846@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.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