public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
To: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Cc: alex.williamson@redhat.com, helgaas@kernel.org, mjrosato@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/10] s390/pci: Restore IRQ unconditionally for the zPCI device
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2025 12:59:32 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5735f0b6c543f1ca1a8d404dca3b6c42ae05d71c.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f3a91866-3897-4872-8336-384bb8e568a4@linux.ibm.com>

On Mon, 2025-09-15 at 10:42 -0700, Farhan Ali wrote:
> On 9/15/2025 1:39 AM, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> > On Thu, 2025-09-11 at 11:33 -0700, Farhan Ali wrote:
> > > Commit c1e18c17bda6 ("s390/pci: add zpci_set_irq()/zpci_clear_irq()"),
> > > introduced the zpci_set_irq() and zpci_clear_irq(), to be used while
> > > resetting a zPCI device.
> > > 
> > > Commit da995d538d3a ("s390/pci: implement reset_slot for hotplug slot"),
> > > mentions zpci_clear_irq() being called in the path for zpci_hot_reset_device().
> > > But that is not the case anymore and these functions are not called
> > > outside of this file.
> > If you're doing another version I think you could add a bit more
> > information on why this still works for existing recovery based on my
> > investigation in
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/052ebdbb6f2d38025ca4345ee51e4857e19bb0e4.camel@linux.ibm.com/
> > 
> > Even if you don't add more explanations, I'd tend to just drop the
> > above paragraph as it doesn't seem relevant and sounds like
> > zpci_hot_reset_device() doesn't clear IRQs. As explained in the linked
> > mail there really is no need to call zpci_clear_irq() in
> > zpci_hot_reset_device() as the CLP disable does disable IRQs. It's
> > really only the state tracking that can get screwed up but is also fine
> > for drivers which end up doing the tear down.
> 
> I referenced commit da995d538d3a as that commit introduced the 
> arch_restore_msi_irqs and describes the reasoning as to why we need it. 
> It also mentions about zpci_clear_irq being called by 
> zpci_hot_reset_device. IMHO the message was confusing as it took me my 
> down the path of trying to identify any commit that changed the behavior 
> since da995d538d3a. But that wasn't the case and it was an error in the 
> commit message. I want to keep a reference here to at least clarify that.

Ok that makes sense, maybe you could add asentence like:
"… these functions are not called outside of this file. Instead
zpci_hot_reset_device() relies on zpci_disable_device() also clearing
the IRQs, but misses to reset the zdev->irqs_registered flag.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-09-16 10:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-09-11 18:32 [PATCH v3 00/10] Error recovery for vfio-pci devices on s390x Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:32 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] PCI: Avoid saving error values for config space Farhan Ali
2025-09-13  8:27   ` Alex Williamson
2025-09-15 17:15     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-16 18:09   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-09-16 20:00     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-19 18:17       ` Alex Williamson
2025-09-11 18:32 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] PCI: Add additional checks for flr reset Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] PCI: Allow per function PCI slots Farhan Ali
2025-09-12 12:23   ` Benjamin Block
2025-09-12 17:19     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-16  6:52   ` Cédric Le Goater
2025-09-16 18:37     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-17  6:21       ` Cédric Le Goater
2025-09-17 17:50         ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] s390/pci: Add architecture specific resource/bus address translation Farhan Ali
2025-09-17 14:48   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-17 17:22     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] s390/pci: Restore IRQ unconditionally for the zPCI device Farhan Ali
2025-09-15  8:39   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-15 17:42     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-16 10:59       ` Niklas Schnelle [this message]
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] s390/pci: Update the logic for detecting passthrough device Farhan Ali
2025-09-15  9:22   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] s390/pci: Store PCI error information for passthrough devices Farhan Ali
2025-09-15 11:42   ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-15 18:12     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-16 10:54       ` Niklas Schnelle
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] vfio-pci/zdev: Add a device feature for error information Farhan Ali
2025-09-13  9:04   ` Alex Williamson
2025-09-15 18:27     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-15  6:26   ` Cédric Le Goater
2025-09-15 18:27     ` Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] vfio: Add a reset_done callback for vfio-pci driver Farhan Ali
2025-09-11 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] vfio: Remove the pcie check for VFIO_PCI_ERR_IRQ_INDEX Farhan Ali

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=5735f0b6c543f1ca1a8d404dca3b6c42ae05d71c.camel@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.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