From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bmailout1.hostsharing.net (bmailout1.hostsharing.net [83.223.95.100]) (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 9935F2C237E for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2026 21:15:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772226930; cv=none; b=fPK/625eWk+J1VknfAROnoxM2HqUsek54yeR4QPhKmKY9SJySgn6EkYoAAtiDy/h92GIz6oVBkVHVpkkKfGgsMp0kZZSasRyfS25fXVD6aKUHsTtTDZNR60FKD2Ek3m5qDYYHBefDfW0KipHbFSK/Ea1kMa7ozWscoS0eH5MB/0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772226930; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GLNKKQCpfivgD8nRR+YfFy5Iq0VKI3RCPIbSqPekDFU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sc5YkMjNerQUeonQTIXpWX1hgrWCZs+Fc5kiCfb1kKLJytKGUo2jq8HXc2mJIAwCz+U5KGimq8AXdkUpAbGmMSB8GWJYCELDsr4WJmXb40C1zCbzBaNp37DbgQxBSETNB6IVaBmzhlHfl/N1qTnQXz3iH0H+ceJ9oyt9xJJnUyU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=h08.hostsharing.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=h08.hostsharing.net Received: from h08.hostsharing.net (h08.hostsharing.net [83.223.95.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384 client-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) client-digest SHA384) (Client CN "*.hostsharing.net", Issuer "GlobalSign GCC R6 AlphaSSL CA 2025" (verified OK)) by bmailout1.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F255B202019F; Fri, 27 Feb 2026 22:15:23 +0100 (CET) Received: by h08.hostsharing.net (Postfix, from userid 100393) id E26AC27C72; Fri, 27 Feb 2026 22:15:23 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 22:15:23 +0100 From: Lukas Wunner To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Sizhe Liu , bhelgaas@google.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com, shiju.jose@huawei.com, keith.busch@intel.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxarm@huawei.com, prime.zeng@hisilicon.com, fanghao11@huawei.com, shenyang39@huawei.com, Shuai Xue , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , Terry Bowman Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/ERR: Clear fatal status of the reporting device Message-ID: References: <20260227102505.3966864-1-liusizhe5@huawei.com> <20260227163118.GA3897131@bhelgaas> 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 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260227163118.GA3897131@bhelgaas> On Fri, Feb 27, 2026 at 06:25:05PM +0800, Sizhe Liu wrote: > During PCIe native AER error recovery, ERR_FATAL status bits are not cleared > after fatal error handling. This causes stale ERR_FATAL bits to be reported > in subsequent AER events, even after reporting "device recovery successful". Wrong. The bits are cleared by: report_slot_reset() err_handler->slot_reset() pci_restore_state() pci_aer_clear_status() pci_aer_raw_clear_status() Is this an LLM-generated submission? The confidently worded but incorrect commit message seems to suggest that it is. If so, please follow the guidelines in Documentation/process/generated-content.rst and be transparent about the tools you used to come up with the patch. Thanks, Lukas