From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: LeoLiu-oc <LeoLiu-oc@zhaoxin.com>
Cc: mahesh@linux.ibm.com, oohall@gmail.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, CobeChen@zhaoxin.com,
TonyWWang@zhaoxin.com, ErosZhang@zhaoxin.com,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dpc: Increase pciehp waiting time for DPC recovery
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2026 14:21:40 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260123202140.GA84703@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260123104034.429060-1-LeoLiu-oc@zhaoxin.com>
[+cc Lukas, pciehp expert and author of a97396c6eb13]
On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 06:40:34PM +0800, LeoLiu-oc wrote:
> Commit a97396c6eb13 ("PCI: pciehp: Ignore Link Down/Up caused by DPC")
> amended PCIe hotplug to not bring down the slot upon Data Link Layer State
> Changed events caused by Downstream Port Containment.
>
> However, PCIe hotplug (pciehp) waits up to 4 seconds before assuming that
> DPC recovery has failed and disabling the slot. This timeout period is
> insufficient for some PCIe devices.
> For example, the E810 dual-port network card driver needs to take over
> 10 seconds to execute its err_detected() callback.
> Since this exceeds the maximum wait time allowed for DPC recovery by the
> hotplug IRQ threads, a race condition occurs between the hotplug thread and
> the dpc_handler() thread.
Add blank lines between paragraphs.
Include the name of the E810 driver so we can easily find the
.err_detected() callback in question. Actually, including the *name*
of that callback would be a very direct way of doing this :)
I guess the problem this fixes is that there was a PCIe error that
triggered DPC, and the E810 .err_detected() works but takes longer
than expected, which results in pciehp disabling the slot when it
doesn't need to? So the user basically sees a dead E810 device?
It seems unfortunate that we have this dependency on the time allowed
for .err_detected() to execute. It's nice if adding arbitrary delay
doesn't break things, but maybe we can't always achieve that.
I see that pci_dpc_recovered() is called from pciehp_ist(). Are we
prepared for long delays there?
> Signed-off-by: LeoLiu-oc <LeoLiu-oc@zhaoxin.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> index fc18349614d7..08b5f275699a 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ bool pci_dpc_recovered(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> * but reports indicate that DPC completes within 4 seconds.
> */
> wait_event_timeout(dpc_completed_waitqueue, dpc_completed(pdev),
> - msecs_to_jiffies(4000));
> + msecs_to_jiffies(16000));
It looks like this breaks the connection between the "completes within
4 seconds" comment and the 4000ms wait_event timeout.
> return test_and_clear_bit(PCI_DPC_RECOVERED, &pdev->priv_flags);
> }
> --
> 2.43.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-23 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-23 10:40 [PATCH] PCI: dpc: Increase pciehp waiting time for DPC recovery LeoLiu-oc
2026-01-23 20:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2026-01-28 10:07 ` LeoLiu-oc
2026-01-28 19:48 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-02-02 5:55 ` LeoLiu-oc
2026-01-30 11:59 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-02-02 6:00 ` LeoLiu-oc
2026-02-02 9:02 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-02-03 11:23 ` Przemek Kitszel
2026-02-04 2:10 ` LeoLiu-oc
2026-02-06 8:13 ` LeoLiu-oc
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=20260123202140.GA84703@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=CobeChen@zhaoxin.com \
--cc=ErosZhang@zhaoxin.com \
--cc=LeoLiu-oc@zhaoxin.com \
--cc=TonyWWang@zhaoxin.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=oohall@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