From: Hongbo Yao <andy.xu@hj-micro.com>
To: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
bhelgaas@google.com, lukas@wunner.de
Cc: mahesh@linux.ibm.com, oohall@gmail.com,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jemma.zhang@hj-micro.com, peter.du@hj-micro.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/DPC: Extend DPC recovery timeout
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 11:20:15 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b9b64b4f-dcec-4ab1-b796-54d66ec91fc5@hj-micro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <24dfe8e2-e4b3-40e9-b9ac-026e057abd30@linux.intel.com>
在 2025/7/8 1:04, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 写道:
>
> On 7/7/25 3:30 AM, Andy Xu wrote:
>> From: Hongbo Yao <andy.xu@hj-micro.com>
>>
>> Extend the DPC recovery timeout from 4 seconds to 7 seconds to
>> support Mellanox ConnectX series network adapters.
>>
>> My environment:
>> - Platform: arm64 N2 based server
>> - Endpoint1: Mellanox Technologies MT27800 Family [ConnectX-5]
>> - Endpoint2: Mellanox Technologies MT2910 Family [ConnectX-7]
>>
>> With the original 4s timeout, hotplug would still be triggered:
>>
>> [ 81.012463] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: DPC: containment event,
>> status:0x1f01 source:0x0000
>> [ 81.014536] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: DPC: unmasked uncorrectable error
>> detected
>> [ 81.029598] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: PCIe Bus Error:
>> severity=Uncorrected (Non-Fatal), type=Transaction Layer, (Receiver ID)
>> [ 81.040830] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: device [0823:0110] error status/
>> mask=00008000/04d40000
>> [ 81.049870] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: [ 0] ERCR (First)
>> [ 81.053520] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: AER: TLP Header: 60008010 010000ff
>> 00001000 9c4c0000
>> [ 81.065793] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_pci_err_detected Device
>> state = 1 health sensors: 1 pci_status: 1. Enter, pci channel state = 2
>> [ 81.076183] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_error_sw_reset:231:(pid
>> 1618): start
>> [ 81.083307] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_error_sw_reset:252:(pid
>> 1618): PCI channel offline, stop waiting for NIC IFC
>> [ 81.077428] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: E-Switch: Disable: mode(LEGACY),
>> nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 81.486693] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1618): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 81.496965] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1618): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 82.395040] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: print_health:819:(pid 0): Fatal
>> error detected
>> [ 82.395493] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: print_health_info:423:(pid 0):
>> PCI slot 1 is unavailable
>> [ 83.431094] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_pci_err_detected Device
>> state = 2 pci_status: 0. Exit, result = 3, need reset
>> [ 83.442100] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_pci_err_detected Device
>> state = 2 health sensors: 1 pci_status: 1. Enter, pci channel state = 2
>> [ 83.441801] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_crdump_collect:50:(pid
>> 2239): crdump: failed to lock gw status -13
>> [ 83.454050] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_error_sw_reset:231:(pid
>> 1618): start
>> [ 83.454050] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_error_sw_reset:252:(pid
>> 1618): PCI channel offline, stop waiting for NIC IFC
>> [ 83.849429] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: E-Switch: Disable: mode(LEGACY),
>> nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 83.858892] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1618): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 83.869464] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1618): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 85.201433] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: pciehp: Slot(41): Link Down
>> [ 85.815016] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_health_try_recover:335:(pid
>> 2239): handling bad device here
>> [ 85.824164] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_error_sw_reset:231:(pid
>> 2239): start
>> [ 85.831283] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_error_sw_reset:252:(pid
>> 2239): PCI channel offline, stop waiting for NIC IFC
>> [ 85.841899] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_unload_one_dev_locked:1612:
>> (pid 2239): mlx5_unload_one_dev_locked: interface is down, NOP
>> [ 85.853799] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_health_wait_pci_up:325:(pid
>> 2239): PCI channel offline, stop waiting for PCI
>> [ 85.863494] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_health_try_recover:338:(pid
>> 2239): health recovery flow aborted, PCI reads still not working
>> [ 85.873231] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_pci_err_detected Device
>> state = 2 pci_status: 0. Exit, result = 3, need reset
>> [ 85.879899] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: E-Switch: Unload vfs:
>> mode(LEGACY), nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 85.921428] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: E-Switch: Disable: mode(LEGACY),
>> nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 85.930491] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1617): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 85.940849] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1617): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 85.949971] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: mlx5_uninit_one:1528:(pid 1617):
>> mlx5_uninit_one: interface is down, NOP
>> [ 85.959944] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.1: E-Switch: cleanup
>> [ 86.035541] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: E-Switch: Unload vfs:
>> mode(LEGACY), nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 86.077568] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: E-Switch: Disable: mode(LEGACY),
>> nvfs(0), neovfs(0), active vports(0)
>> [ 86.071727] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1617): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 86.096577] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_wait_for_pages:786:(pid
>> 1617): Skipping wait for vf pages stage
>> [ 86.106909] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: mlx5_uninit_one:1528:(pid 1617):
>> mlx5_uninit_one: interface is down, NOP
>> [ 86.115940] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: AER: subordinate device reset failed
>> [ 86.122557] pcieport 0004:00:00.0: AER: device recovery failed
>> [ 86.128571] mlx5_core 0004:01:00.0: E-Switch: cleanup
>>
>> I added some prints and found that:
>> - ConnectX-5 requires >5s for full recovery
>> - ConnectX-7 requires >6s for full recovery
>>
>> Setting timeout to 7s covers both devices with safety margin.
>
>
> Instead of updating the recovery time, can you check why your device
> recovery takes
> such a long time and how to fix it from the device end?
>
Hi, Sathyanarayanan.
Thanks for the valuable feedback and suggestions.
I fully agree that ideally the root cause should be addressed on the
device side to reduce the DPC recovery latency, and that waiting longer
in the kernel is not a perfect solution.
However, the current 4 seconds timeout in pci_dpc_recovered() is indeed
an empirical value rather than a hard requirement from the PCIe
specification. In real-world scenarios, like with Mellanox ConnectX-5/7
adapters, we've observed that full DPC recovery can take more than 5-6
seconds, which leads to premature hotplug processing and device removal.
To improve robustness and maintain flexibility, I’m considering
introducing a module parameter to allow tuning the DPC recovery timeout
dynamically. Would you like me to prepare and submit such a patch for
review?
Best regards,
Hongbo Yao
>
>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Yao <andy.xu@hj-micro.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
>> index fc18349614d7..35a37fd86dcd 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
>> @@ -118,10 +118,10 @@ bool pci_dpc_recovered(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> /*
>> * Need a timeout in case DPC never completes due to failure of
>> * dpc_wait_rp_inactive(). The spec doesn't mandate a time limit,
>> - * but reports indicate that DPC completes within 4 seconds.
>> + * but reports indicate that DPC completes within 7 seconds.
>> */
>> wait_event_timeout(dpc_completed_waitqueue, dpc_completed(pdev),
>> - msecs_to_jiffies(4000));
>> + msecs_to_jiffies(7000));
>> return test_and_clear_bit(PCI_DPC_RECOVERED, &pdev->priv_flags);
>> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-11 6:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-07 10:30 [PATCH] PCI/DPC: Extend DPC recovery timeout Andy Xu
2025-07-07 17:04 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
2025-07-11 3:20 ` Hongbo Yao [this message]
2025-07-11 4:13 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-08-06 21:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-06 21:52 ` Keith Busch
2025-08-07 1:54 ` Ethan Zhao
2025-08-07 2:00 ` Ethan Zhao
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=b9b64b4f-dcec-4ab1-b796-54d66ec91fc5@hj-micro.com \
--to=andy.xu@hj-micro.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=jemma.zhang@hj-micro.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=oohall@gmail.com \
--cc=peter.du@hj-micro.com \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.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).