From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] PCI/DPC: Ignore Surprise Down error on hot removal
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 14:01:49 +0200 (EET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3c5da397-6d72-26cd-7204-4388ff3da1dd@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240207181854.121335-1-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3924 bytes --]
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024, Smita Koralahalli wrote:
> According to PCIe r6.0 sec 6.7.6 [1], async removal with DPC may result in
> surprise down error. This error is expected and is just a side-effect of
> async remove.
>
> Ignore surprise down error generated as a side-effect of async remove.
> Typically, this error is benign as the pciehp handler invoked by PDC
> or/and DLLSC alongside DPC, de-enumerates and brings down the device
> appropriately. But the error messages might confuse users. Get rid of
> these irritating log messages with a 1s delay while pciehp waits for
> dpc recovery.
>
> The implementation is as follows: On an async remove a DPC is triggered
> along with a Presence Detect State change and/or DLL State Change.
> Determine it's an async remove by checking for DPC Trigger Status in DPC
> Status Register and Surprise Down Error Status in AER Uncorrected Error
> Status to be non-zero. If true, treat the DPC event as a side-effect of
> async remove, clear the error status registers and continue with hot-plug
> tear down routines. If not, follow the existing routine to handle AER and
> DPC errors.
>
> Please note that, masking Surprise Down Errors was explored as an
> alternative approach, but left due to the odd behavior that masking only
> avoids the interrupt, but still records an error per PCIe r6.0.1 Section
> 6.2.3.2.2. That stale error is going to be reported the next time some
> error other than Surprise Down is handled.
>
> Dmesg before:
>
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: DPC: containment event, status:0x1f01 source:0x0000
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: DPC: unmasked uncorrectable error detected
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: PCIe Bus Error: severity=Uncorrected (Fatal), type=Transaction Layer, (Receiver ID)
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: device [1022:14ab] error status/mask=00000020/04004000
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: [ 5] SDES (First)
> nvme nvme2: frozen state error detected, reset controller
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: DPC: Data Link Layer Link Active not set in 1000 msec
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: AER: subordinate device reset failed
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: AER: device recovery failed
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: pciehp: Slot(16): Link Down
> nvme2n1: detected capacity change from 1953525168 to 0
> pci 0000:04:00.0: Removing from iommu group 49
>
> Dmesg after:
>
> pcieport 0000:00:01.4: pciehp: Slot(16): Link Down
> nvme1n1: detected capacity change from 1953525168 to 0
> pci 0000:04:00.0: Removing from iommu group 37
>
> [1] PCI Express Base Specification Revision 6.0, Dec 16 2021.
> https://members.pcisig.com/wg/PCI-SIG/document/16609
>
> Signed-off-by: Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
> Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> +static void pci_clear_surpdn_errors(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + if (pdev->dpc_rp_extensions)
> + pci_write_config_dword(pdev, pdev->dpc_cap +
> + PCI_EXP_DPC_RP_PIO_STATUS, ~0);
> +
> + /*
> + * In practice, Surprise Down errors have been observed to also set
> + * error bits in the Status Register as well as the Fatal Error
> + * Detected bit in the Device Status Register.
> + */
> + pci_write_config_word(pdev, PCI_STATUS, 0xffff);
Nit: one of these is using ~0 and the other 0xffff which is a bit
inconsistent.
> +static bool dpc_is_surprise_removal(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + u16 status;
> +
> + if (!pdev->is_hotplug_bridge)
> + return false;
> +
> + if (pci_read_config_word(pdev, pdev->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_UNCOR_STATUS,
> + &status))
> + return false;
Since you need a line split, I'd have used:
ret = pci_read_config_word(...
...);
if (ret != PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL)
return false;
Reviewed-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
--
i.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-08 12:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-07 18:18 [PATCH v9] PCI/DPC: Ignore Surprise Down error on hot removal Smita Koralahalli
2024-02-08 12:01 ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2024-02-28 16:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=3c5da397-6d72-26cd-7204-4388ff3da1dd@linux.intel.com \
--to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=yazen.ghannam@amd.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).