From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83FAF1332A6; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 12:19:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.17 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707221964; cv=none; b=Hjj71MGLnKZTNjAUPNQIaK6gdfW0Ap5DtY+YYANz+HAVuaZ3vIS22jACO7AmEnGDCJ+nGmG6GFz+BFY2PcMTaqzH/V3h7OrWEapOGSkJtYAcAplS4C2dEBPbyB3vHKp4tmKmXMtXNrkaBQNs+JuaJMa+knsg6uR99a+kKlSwjEI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707221964; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vOPlbom+hZu2FqS78/OBAPTU/ql3MwKYrdqCAkJSiKU=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tiK5G1ylD15/VH2fpGmPpbujRRZjugO3Vj18byhu8R0AMxktqAzxUpLJfEBJBIr58qCCGCSeIhENb0IP2G7D7cGF4z/ZK5V5WkcW1D1CPF5IijoHRhotMX/qYYz+GRPox3tImbcu/GMX5ezmriRbnc4o8SVEUmZImCBQyfUipcg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=A9UWKuJp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.17 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="A9UWKuJp" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707221963; x=1738757963; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=vOPlbom+hZu2FqS78/OBAPTU/ql3MwKYrdqCAkJSiKU=; b=A9UWKuJpf0ja4NyaMtw8XyX4PiNzwv3v+pmFAPqjVVxKGm9sr0PeDo3l Dy0RL3IMfO57ofY02CT6KLcPKJNR6z5hBGcwd4cizz4cbiwW8aiC8o6EV mWlWlpJVonIb7RvjiyrZZeiv1wf6abc1topycwZ0fClpxiiQT/gL2ErjJ R/6KXTDGr7Glvo3m+oJfjy33V3TwwnbtpQEPH7RxqM38CgHGDkOkbeefP VUdtQbjbPCAhHjRS20uE0FmY1mNjBYQ/Ntww+z+rKHZk5/U94Lk1BTN43 n/k1/Ka5WkPC8aHIyEw4wN59TzhiaCPsMixWzXpCHKb8JgzlP+o9JyuWO A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10975"; a="631608" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,247,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="631608" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by fmvoesa111.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2024 04:19:21 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,247,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="31826258" Received: from ijarvine-desk1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.246.36.139]) by orviesa002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2024 04:19:18 -0800 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 14:19:13 +0200 (EET) To: Smita Koralahalli cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Bjorn Helgaas , Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Lukas Wunner , Yazen Ghannam Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] PCI/DPC: Ignore Surprise Down error on hot removal In-Reply-To: <20240205190321.103164-1-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> Message-ID: <881a8ba0-729f-7d36-d696-4fa80b1b03c2@linux.intel.com> References: <20240205190321.103164-1-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 5 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 > Reviewed-by: Lukas Wunner > Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan > --- > v2: > Indentation is taken care. (Bjorn) > Unrelevant dmesg logs are removed. (Bjorn) > Rephrased commit message, to be clear on native vs FW-First > handling. (Bjorn and Sathyanarayanan) > Prefix changed from pciehp_ to dpc_. (Lukas) > Clearing ARI and AtomicOp Requester are performed as a part of > (de-)enumeration in pciehp_unconfigure_device(). (Lukas) > Changed to clearing all optional capabilities in DEVCTL2. > OS-First -> native. (Sathyanarayanan) > > v3: > Added error message when root port become inactive. > Modified commit description to add more details. > Rearranged code comments and function calls with no functional > change. > Additional check for is_hotplug_bridge. > dpc_completed_waitqueue to wakeup pciehp handler. > Cleared only Fatal error detected in DEVSTA. > > v4: > Made read+write conditional on "if (pdev->dpc_rp_extensions)" > for DPC_RP_PIO_STATUS. > Wrapped to 80 chars. > Code comment for clearing PCI_STATUS and PCI_EXP_DEVSTA. > Added pcie_wait_for_link() check. > Removed error message for root port inactive as the message > already existed. > Check for is_hotplug_bridge before registers read. > Section 6.7.6 of the PCIe Base Spec 6.0 -> PCIe r6.0 sec 6.7.6. > Made code comment more meaningful. > > v5: > $SUBJECT correction. > Added "Reviewed-by" tag. > No code changes. Re-spin on latest base to get Bjorn's > attention. > > v6: > Change to write 1's to clear error. (Sathyanarayanan) > > v7: > No changes. Rebasing on pci main branch as per Bjorn comments. > --- > drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+) > > +static bool dpc_is_surprise_removal(struct pci_dev *pdev) > +{ > + u16 status; > + > + if (!pdev->is_hotplug_bridge) > + return false; > + > + pci_read_config_word(pdev, pdev->aer_cap + PCI_ERR_UNCOR_STATUS, > + &status); > + > + if (!(status & PCI_ERR_UNC_SURPDN)) > + return false; > + > + return true; It would be simpler to just state and also easier to understand: return status & PCI_ERR_UNC_SURPDN; C rules will handle the conversion to bool. > +} > + > static irqreturn_t dpc_handler(int irq, void *context) > { > struct pci_dev *pdev = context; > > + /* > + * According to PCIe r6.0 sec 6.7.6, errors are an expected side effect > + * of async removal and should be ignored by software. > + */ > + if (dpc_is_surprise_removal(pdev)) { > + dpc_handle_surprise_removal(pdev); > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > + } > + > dpc_process_error(pdev); > > /* We configure DPC so it only triggers on ERR_FATAL */ -- i.