linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jay Cornwall <jay@jcornwall.me>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PCIe 3.0 AtomicOp capabilities
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:39:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <841e1480e445f3bcde269a147a269a92@jcornwall.me> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo6OLAjVde8St2kCoqx3h9hX9ki+X9Ojy0eFqugvBKRrwg@mail.gmail.com>

On 2015-08-11 10:10, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Jay Cornwall <jay@jcornwall.me> wrote:
> 
>> Should the AtomicOp capabilities be similarly enabled if available? Or 
>> might
>> there be a reason for doing this on a per-driver basis?
> 
> I'm not very familiar with the AtomicOp functionality, but a quick
> skim of the spec suggests that it does have system implications and
> should be handled by the core. For example, AtomicOp support is
> optional, and it looks like it would be a bad idea to enable it in an
> endpoint if the upstream switch didn't support it.

This makes sense, but I think there are some cases in which upstream is 
ambiguous.

For example, consider a root complex which does not support AtomicOp 
completion but supports routing to another endpoint which does. Would 
the necessary condition for enabling AtomicOp requests be that at least 
one other completion-capable endpoint is reachable?

-- 
Jay Cornwall

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-12  0:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-08-10 18:36 PCIe 3.0 AtomicOp capabilities Jay Cornwall
2015-08-11 15:10 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-08-12  0:39   ` Jay Cornwall [this message]
2015-08-13 20:40     ` 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=841e1480e445f3bcde269a147a269a92@jcornwall.me \
    --to=jay@jcornwall.me \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).