linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Cc: Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	alex.williamson@redhat.com, helgaas@kernel.org, clg@redhat.com,
	schnelle@linux.ibm.com, mjrosato@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] PCI: Avoid saving error values for config space
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2025 10:56:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <21ef5524-738a-43d5-bc9a-87f907a8aa70@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aOZoWDQV0TNh-NiM@wunner.de>


On 10/8/2025 6:34 AM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 02:35:49PM -0700, Farhan Ali wrote:
>> On 10/6/2025 12:26 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 06, 2025 at 10:54:51AM -0700, Farhan Ali wrote:
>>>> On 10/4/2025 7:54 AM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
>>>>> I believe this also makes patch [01/10] in your series unnecessary.
>>>> I tested your patches + patches 2-10 of this series. It unfortunately didn't
>>>> completely help with the s390x use case. We still need the check to in
>>>> pci_save_state() from this patch to make sure we are not saving error
>>>> values, which can be written back to the device in pci_restore_state().
>>> What's the caller of pci_save_state() that needs this?
>>>
>>> Can you move the check for PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR() to the caller?
>>> I think plenty of other callers don't need this, so it adds
>>> extra overhead for them and down the road it'll be difficult
>>> to untangle which caller needs it and which doesn't.
>> The caller would be pci_dev_save_and_disable(). Are you suggesting moving
>> the PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR() prior to calling pci_save_state()?
> I'm not sure yet.  Let's back up a little:  I'm missing an
> architectural description how you're intending to do error
> recovery in the VM.  If I understand correctly, you're
> informing the VM of the error via the ->error_detected() callback.
>
> You're saying you need to check for accessibility of the device
> prior to resetting it from the VM, does that mean you're attempting
> a reset from the ->error_detected() callback?
>
> According to Documentation/PCI/pci-error-recovery.rst, the device
> isn't supposed to be considered accessible in ->error_detected().
> The first callback which allows access is ->mmio_enabled().
>
> I also don't quite understand why the VM needs to perform a reset.
> Why can't you just let the VM tell the host that a reset is needed
> (PCI_ERS_RESULT_NEED_RESET) and then the host resets the device on
> behalf of the VM?

The ->error_detected() callback is used to inform userspace of an error. 
In the case of a VM, using QEMU as a userspace, once notified of an 
error QEMU will inject an error into the guest in s390x architecture 
specific way [1] (probably should have linked the QEMU series in the 
cover letter). Once notified of the error VM's device driver will drive 
the recovery action. The recovery action require a reset of the device 
and on s390x PCI devices are reset using architecture specific 
instructions (zpci_device_hot_reset()). QEMU will intercept any low 
level recovery instructions from the VM and then perform a reset of 
device on behalf of the VM [2]. QEMU performs a reset by invoking the 
VFIO_DEVICE_RESET ioctl, which attempts to reset the device 
using pci_try_reset_function().

Once a device is in an error state, MMIO to the device is blocked and so 
any PCI reads to the Config Space will return -1. Since 
pci_try_reset_function() will try to save the state of device's Config 
Space with pci_dev_save_and_disable(), it will end up saving -1 as the 
state. Later when we try to restore the state after a reset, we end up 
corrupting device registers which can send the device into an error 
state again. I was trying to avoid this with the patch.

Hopefully, this answers your questions.

[1] QEMU series 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250925174852.1302-1-alifm@linux.ibm.com/

[2] v1 patch series discussion on some nuances of reset mechanism 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250814145743.204ca19a.alex.williamson@redhat.com/

>
> Furthermore, I'm thinking that you should be using pci_channel_offline()
> to detect accessibility of the device, rather than reading from
> Config Space and checking for PCI_POSSIBLE_ERROR().
>
>>> The state saved on device addition is just the initial state and
>>> it is fine if later on it gets updated (which is a nicer term than
>>> "overwritten").  E.g. when portdrv.c instantiates port services
>>> and drivers are bound to them, various registers in Config Space
>>> are changed, hence pcie_portdrv_probe() calls pci_save_state()
>>> again.
>>>
>>> However we can discuss whether pci_save_state() is still needed
>>> in pci_dev_save_and_disable().
>> The commit 8dd7f8036c12 ("PCI: add support for function level reset")
>> introduced the logic of saving/restoring the device state after an FLR. My
>> assumption is it was done to save the most recent state of the device (as
>> the state could be updated by drivers). So I think it would still make sense
>> to save the device state in pci_dev_save_and_disable() if the Config Space
>> is still accessible?
> Yes, right now we can't assume that drivers call pci_save_state()
> in their probe hook if they modified Config Space.  They may rely
> on the state being saved prior to reset or a D3hot/D3cold transition.
> So we need to keep the pci_dev_save_and_disable() call for now.
>
> Generally the expectation is that Config Space is accessible when
> performing a reset with pci_try_reset_function().  Since that's
> apparently not guaranteed for your use case, I'm wondering if you
> might be using the function in a context it's not supposed to be used.

I am open to suggestions on how we can do this.

Thanks

Farhan


  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-08 17:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-24 17:16 [PATCH v4 00/10] Error recovery for vfio-pci devices on s390x Farhan Ali
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 01/10] PCI: Avoid saving error values for config space Farhan Ali
2025-10-01 15:15   ` Benjamin Block
2025-10-01 17:12     ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-02  9:16       ` Benjamin Block
2025-10-04 14:54       ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-06 17:54         ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-06 19:26           ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-06 21:35             ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-08 13:34               ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-08 17:56                 ` Farhan Ali [this message]
2025-10-08 18:14                   ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-08 21:55                     ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-09  4:52                       ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-09 17:02                         ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-12  6:43                           ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-09  9:12                     ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-10-12  6:34                       ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-14 12:07                         ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-10-16 21:00                           ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-19 14:34                           ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20  8:59                             ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-11-22 10:58                               ` Lukas Wunner
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 02/10] PCI: Add additional checks for flr reset Farhan Ali
2025-09-30 10:03   ` Benjamin Block
2025-09-30 17:04     ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-01  8:33       ` Benjamin Block
2025-10-01 14:37   ` Benjamin Block
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 03/10] PCI: Allow per function PCI slots Farhan Ali
2025-10-01 14:34   ` Benjamin Block
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 04/10] s390/pci: Add architecture specific resource/bus address translation Farhan Ali
2025-09-25 10:54   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-10-01 16:04     ` Benjamin Block
2025-10-01 18:01       ` Farhan Ali
2025-10-02 12:58   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-10-02 17:00     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-10-02 17:16       ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-10-02 18:14       ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 05/10] s390/pci: Restore IRQ unconditionally for the zPCI device Farhan Ali
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 06/10] s390/pci: Update the logic for detecting passthrough device Farhan Ali
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 07/10] s390/pci: Store PCI error information for passthrough devices Farhan Ali
2025-09-25 14:28   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-25 16:29     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 08/10] vfio-pci/zdev: Add a device feature for error information Farhan Ali
2025-09-25  8:04   ` kernel test robot
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 09/10] vfio: Add a reset_done callback for vfio-pci driver Farhan Ali
2025-09-24 17:16 ` [PATCH v4 10/10] vfio: Remove the pcie check for VFIO_PCI_ERR_IRQ_INDEX Farhan Ali

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=21ef5524-738a-43d5-bc9a-87f907a8aa70@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=bblock@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=clg@redhat.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.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).