From: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kbusch@kernel.org,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, mahesh@linux.ibm.com,
oohall@gmail.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com,
terry.bowman@amd.com, tianruidong@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/5] PCI/AER: Report fatal errors of RCiEP and EP if link recoverd
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 16:07:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <789970ab-c675-498b-899e-d0d37ddfbc17@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <239a003e-24dc-4e75-b677-a2c596b31c32@linux.alibaba.com>
在 2025/10/24 14:43, Shuai Xue 写道:
>
>
> 在 2025/10/23 18:48, Lukas Wunner 写道:
>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 11:20:58PM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote:
>>> 2025/10/20 22:24, Lukas Wunner:
>>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 10:17:10PM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote:
>>>>>>> .slot_reset()
>>>>>>> => pci_restore_state()
>>>>>>> => pci_aer_clear_status()
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This was added in 2015 by b07461a8e45b. The commit claims that
>>>>>> the errors are stale and can be ignored. It turns out they cannot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So maybe pci_restore_state() should print information about the
>>>>>> errors before clearing them?
>>>>>
>>>>> While that could work, we would lose the error severity information at
>>>>
>>>> Wait, we've got that saved in pci_cap_saved_state, so we could restore
>>>> the severity register, report leftover errors, then clear those errors?
>>>
>>> You're right that the severity register is also sticky, so we could
>>> retrieve error severity directly from AER registers.
>>>
>>> However, I have concerns about implementing this approach:
>> [...]
>>> 3. Architectural consistency: As you noted earlier, "pci_restore_state()
>>> is only supposed to restore state, as the name implies, and not clear
>>> errors." Adding error reporting to this function would further violate
>>> this principle - we'd be making it do even more than just restore state.
>>>
>>> Would you prefer I implement this broader change, or shall we proceed
>>> with the targeted helper function approach for now? The helper function
>>> solves the immediate problem while keeping the changes focused on the
>>> AER recovery path.
>>
>> My opinion is that b07461a8e45b was wrong and that reported errors
>> should not be silently ignored.
>
> Thanks for your input and for discussing the history of commit
> b07461a8e45b. I understand its intention to ignore errors specifically
> during enumeration. As far as I know, AdvNonFatalErr events can occur in
> this phase and typically should be ignored to simplify handling.
>
>> What I'd prefer is that if
>> pci_restore_state() discovers unreported errors, it asks the AER driver
>> to report them.
>>
>> We've already got a helper to do that: aer_recover_queue()
>> It queues up an entry in AER's kfifo and asks AER to report it.
>>
>> So far the function is only used by GHES. GHES allocates the
>> aer_regs argument from ghes_estatus_pool using gen_pool_alloc().
>> Consequently aer_recover_work_func() uses ghes_estatus_pool_region_free()
>> to free the allocation. That prevents using aer_recover_queue()
>> for anything else than GHES. It would first be necessary to
>> refactor aer_recover_queue() + aer_recover_work_func() such that
>> it can cope with arbitrary allocations (e.g. kmalloc()).
>
> I agree that aer_recover_queue() and aer_recover_work_func() offer a
> generalized way to report errors.
>
> However, I’d like to highlight some concerns regarding error discovery
> during pci_restore_state():
>
> - Errors During Enumeration via Hotplug: Errors such as AdvNonFatalErr
> seen during enumeration or hotplug are generally intended to be
> ignored, as handling them adds unnecessary complexity without
> practical benefits.
>
> - Errors During Downstream Port Containment (DPC): When an error is
> detected and not masked, it is expected to propagate through the usual
> AER path, either reported directly to the OS or to the firmware.
> Finally, these errors should be cleared and reported in a single
> cohesive step.
>
> For missed fatal errors during DPC, queuing additional work to report
> these errors using aer_recover_queue() could introduce significant
> overhead. Specifically: It may result in the bus being reset and the
> device reset again, which could unnecessarily disrupt system operation.
>
> Do we really need the heavy way?
>
> I would appreciate more feedback from the community on whether queuing
> another recovery task for errors detected during pci_restore_state()
>
Hi, ALL,
Gentle ping.
Any feedback is welcomed.
Thanks.
Shuai
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-16 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-15 2:41 [PATCH v6 0/5] PCI/AER: Report fatal errors of RCiEP and EP if link recoverd Shuai Xue
2025-10-15 2:41 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] PCI/DPC: Clarify naming for error port in DPC Handling Shuai Xue
2025-10-15 2:41 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] PCI/DPC: Run recovery on device that detected the error Shuai Xue
2025-10-15 2:41 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] PCI/AER: Report fatal errors of RCiEP and EP if link recoverd Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 10:10 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20 12:58 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 13:54 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20 14:17 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 14:24 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20 15:20 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-23 10:48 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-24 6:43 ` Shuai Xue
2025-12-16 8:07 ` Shuai Xue [this message]
2025-10-20 18:38 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2025-10-21 1:51 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-15 2:41 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] PCI/ERR: Use pcie_aer_is_native() to check for native AER control Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 10:17 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20 13:09 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 13:58 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-20 14:45 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-23 10:29 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-24 3:09 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-24 3:14 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-24 3:38 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-24 4:03 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-24 5:37 ` Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 18:43 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2025-10-15 2:41 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] PCI/AER: Clear both AER fatal and non-fatal status Shuai Xue
2025-10-20 18:44 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2025-10-21 1:33 ` Shuai Xue
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=789970ab-c675-498b-899e-d0d37ddfbc17@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=xueshuai@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=oohall@gmail.com \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=terry.bowman@amd.com \
--cc=tianruidong@linux.alibaba.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).