linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>,
	xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI/MSI: Add pci_enable_msi_partial()
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 14:01:30 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1404792090.26459.1.camel@concordia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140702202201.GA28852@google.com>

On Wed, 2014-07-02 at 14:22 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 03:10:30PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> > There are PCI devices that require a particular value written
> > to the Multiple Message Enable (MME) register while aligned on
> > power of 2 boundary value of actually used MSI vectors 'nvec'
> > is a lesser of that MME value:
> > 
> > 	roundup_pow_of_two(nvec) < 'Multiple Message Enable'
> > 
> > However the existing pci_enable_msi_block() interface is not
> > able to configure such devices, since the value written to the
> > MME register is calculated from the number of requested MSIs
> > 'nvec':
> > 
> > 	'Multiple Message Enable' = roundup_pow_of_two(nvec)
> 
> For MSI, software learns how many vectors a device requests by reading
> the Multiple Message Capable (MMC) field.  This field is encoded, so a
> device can only request 1, 2, 4, 8, etc., vectors.  It's impossible
> for a device to request 3 vectors; it would have to round up that up
> to a power of two and request 4 vectors.
> 
> Software writes similarly encoded values to MME to tell the device how
> many vectors have been allocated for its use.  For example, it's
> impossible to tell the device that it can use 3 vectors; the OS has to
> round that up and tell the device it can use 4 vectors.
> 
> So if I understand correctly, the point of this series is to take
> advantage of device-specific knowledge, e.g., the device requests 4
> vectors via MMC, but we "know" the device is only capable of using 3.
> Moreover, we tell the device via MME that 4 vectors are available, but
> we've only actually set up 3 of them.
> 
> This makes me uneasy because we're lying to the device, and the device
> is perfectly within spec to use all 4 of those vectors.  If anything
> changes the number of vectors the device uses (new device revision,
> firmware upgrade, etc.), this is liable to break.

It also adds more complexity into the already complex MSI API, across all
architectures, all so a single Intel chipset can save a couple of MSIs. That
seems like the wrong trade off to me.

cheers

      parent reply	other threads:[~2014-07-08  4:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-10 13:10 [PATCH 0/3] Add pci_enable_msi_partial() to conserve MSI-related resources Alexander Gordeev
2014-06-10 13:10 ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/MSI: Add pci_enable_msi_partial() Alexander Gordeev
2014-06-23 20:11   ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-02 20:22   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-07-03  9:20     ` David Laight
2014-07-04  8:58       ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-04  9:11         ` David Laight
2014-07-04  9:54           ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-07 19:26         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-07-08  8:33           ` David Laight
2014-07-04  8:57     ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-07 19:40       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-07-07 20:42         ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-08 12:26         ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-09 16:06           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-07-10 10:11             ` Alexander Gordeev
2014-07-10 17:02               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-07-08  4:01     ` Michael Ellerman [this message]

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=1404792090.26459.1.camel@concordia \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=agordeev@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).