From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B274CA9ED0 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 18:59:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4j3Rbd6g1Wz30hC; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 05:59:41 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2a00:1450:4864:20::42a" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1791831581; cv=none; b=ZB4tVqwWy09ArLFtAMetbmW48sZygjwjQwMIh+lEYLI383wLNYvQlZyRjVTjkyZX7gGIru6HOZkCq62jD8n3ZCPgKbVZy+HhugaUgei3sKi/3RX62vjOXoxmgbS0F/Ch2tpYB5S2x2711VAJLTCQTSpS/Nk2QoEtz6IDeCylpkxRab6RVZnrZJJjp0F3KQBDxbAOkppZ7UuhxGy6HFgIL9BiWLv1Gx6aC+TO+vORi+67oJGKyRriUWu973F16jetbuEuHIuwJWhLzsxy0qx3DYnQPR/cHBptPz2R5AR2CUDQTBbkwVeMCCztiTo5zQyUFRiBGMOUCfOrELCrrps4rg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1791831581; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=YHE/SGYcUV1OUJwt26eXa2xg6GrIMfRUdwuOqUARZ48=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=IgofYZOPRozfN5QaXHImT6D42JEVQiHRsgMAxppb+VZPF40Wr7Chs9+mwnHCVthwGWvg59npJrj4tuFD9+9KL+vV4v1+/tFd2xO6/AQYb1i25M0TCKR3c6aLfUhe2ZIETNfAO+aCaFiA2AHzggMr1sXg8q02TePcCo6E47KvX4X+MPaYaol/HCyMEGu2fftCjVGttxDV+S3rg11VJl/CK9JsqIgoZXdcgztkJQNssamFzXbxGZ2Paa7ffcj/fSs3Wy1EF3XQwTbnc8cW0LE81xlLr/EWDRH7gHtH/+7vlLOCONGu7ET/QhCcn8sh3xKJC1wBOpdZWvTikruFqAYF6g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=M78lF7zK; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42a; helo=mail-wr1-x42a.google.com; envelope-from=abhinjoses@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20251104 header.b=M78lF7zK; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com (client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42a; helo=mail-wr1-x42a.google.com; envelope-from=abhinjoses@gmail.com; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com (mail-wr1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4j3Rbc1mnZz2xSV for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2026 05:59:39 +1100 (AEDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-48b060ec084so1364623f8f.0 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 11:59:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1791831577; x=1792436377; darn=lists.ozlabs.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=YHE/SGYcUV1OUJwt26eXa2xg6GrIMfRUdwuOqUARZ48=; b=M78lF7zKAdUB9KgZ/4baDQM8sa/8nXuBtGbKlo4ExhplLFSzjhYbpaDKBXKGsbGs2+ e6mH3+Qlsi5tM4HskMgUorykiNwChxiA0+WRGpvwoDtna5/IzdxJlQtT8tUcMyhUbg5X KW7N85TzFoDHQBvbDDSIIlEmDfoYc2yh7Za8Yby5N4dlwv/nPmVmd9gTJlpZvvDoMopM SuZuLA36v2kVK3slN5BZMWWF1M4v5XBGwsWjLEdxds0nxeELmw+UWWQ7nEjd/tFytU/p vHxrfIwfL+sF8K7gUTsLH9f+Is2a3ViHenwLCzXjUjMw1BXApgyIsasvqPf9KlpWSv99 n1Uw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1791831577; x=1792436377; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=YHE/SGYcUV1OUJwt26eXa2xg6GrIMfRUdwuOqUARZ48=; b=Q6uC7l5WwOHyjMKzBuWMQw4Qaa2E0YTMRQs2CrA1aRM2Fnsx7Tc78aUb16qVTUKTTt 3DhU7+qVKTDVtMGTPHTqfiLETKWiNta2NWcmCPkSy/OGXLRPZh6pDdEsy44+SpjhSJup MpxND17pOzTENW/Xs/hP3ARS2Wfd4kTdH65/J7hc0I0Hfqmb6uQDvChem1uzIEfMzKnQ mD8I/g7PPgB1Bpnw2zRX8ar2O5MAwX8h2FJf6NBI7YWiO+zA2viYn1Hh/TtPk54zTEup uEep19SUJnVI09iLkxffUOzSn/BSDblo8OWl2Z4MYTQX6qdPDe2liUy5K1lrwy161TYp 2lgg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvByyi2Oj25oRPrHPxHicIQm/rljWAStakm787Yz8xXSos6m76U8ZfAPvu4uCeWzmlhyuMbMbpGuw3lXmosw=@lists.ozlabs.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFq9FYJG3NffyMeY6LSAwccYEN2hPpr1VVEOUMlEOecuGQYfC+/ESTm7 v38iPGfby8JlcMgFPqkiiJ7uSd2bhaojgKQHFpvsMthEB5ygjTKO2CRC X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2UFpEGdAASSg1SyDwngSR0Ppmgj0/ThFBD7247JD/Y+RW9Ltnzgv/MSnakMxZ sXnPL4IFcVrSYVP+E5X4dyaWlWzL9eeaWzfTo3e3S2OTFpo/BcmxqcrHIjD/hkOvtggdtD7eZa1 6r/tTcBci1UZ/PR/4doUKDQkEAwCgbe3TDFHKTLrINrm0C6Zgo50NAxscqzZN81s1MyvbV7BmiM K+h0KjCOAlLVJ/mIz+ms9Ut03bTnJTacd/zxoxq9i+mZZvhbmLnNclDLWoNyEy4vOGIe9r/JhXq 7FGD3j0xFN4w/14IP0nBP0fOL5zSUR1kxDKdnxpFs3q/Lxwx7DhHTub3wCd5LONvqs1s25WIfrf LbL1aFa4RbUchoski827waG7x4nLKY7R4eWOP9Sm4eH5V76xEcmJS5R6FHiw2KoCYEN9vu85SKU 0lMYWalBuPFmhDmZW0JihOyJffeAqwqN/myNuC5j6umUEAshxTo+uwTdZuNpo3BNnGUly445v/g q0KduLlWTFO3Iql0t4jv93JC4kjq2x8LrymBiEFakcyyH1UXcQG/JJJb7za0NPRIQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:4818:b0:48a:ffcc:5b50 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-48dbace8c04mr18035952f8f.40.1791831576447; Mon, 12 Oct 2026 11:59:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from home-desktop (dynamic-002-214-019-128.2.214.pool.telefonica.de. [2.214.19.128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-48de0ab5262sm871105f8f.22.2026.10.12.11.59.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 12 Oct 2026 11:59:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 20:59:33 +0200 From: Abhin Parekadan Jose To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Lukas Wunner , Ilpo =?utf-8?B?SsOkcnZpbmVu?= , Shuai Xue , Kees Cook , Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Oliver O'Halloran , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v4 0/5] PCI: pciehp: Report surprise removal during safe removal Message-ID: References: <20260927182017.938565-1-abhinjoses@gmail.com> <20261012022556-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20261012022556-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 02:32:02AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Oct 12, 2026 at 07:39:34AM +0200, Abhin Parekadan Jose wrote: > > Gentle ping on this RFC. > > > > Lukas, Bjorn, could you let me know whether the general direction is > > acceptable before I work on a non-RFC version? Any comments on the > > approach would help. > > > > Thanks, > > Abhin > > I'd say, complete the picture. acpi,shpc,polling... Ok. > > Maybe think about how this interacts with pci_ignore_hotplug > (seems to weirdly check presence then ignore)? Yeah, the order is wrong in v4. The presence read should come after the `ignore_hotplug` check. Will fix. (Need to still find out why this was introduced. Looks like only the GPU drivers use it.) > > And test with virtio not with edu. Bjorn had asked me to keep this puerly PCI[1], So I had decoupled it from the virtio changes. I could post another series with those changes with a dependecy to this series. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260826194815.GA1552818@bhelgaas/ > > > On Sun, Sep 27, 2026 at 06:20:11PM +0000, Abhin Parekadan Jose wrote: > > > If a safe removal is already in progress when the device is surprise > > > removed, pciehp cannot report the disconnect [1]. The removal blocks > > > waiting on a device interrupt or status read, and pciehp's IRQ thread is > > > single-threaded and is itself executing that removal, so it never runs > > > again to report the device gone. The removal hangs indefinitely. > > > > > > pciehp_isr() does run while the IRQ thread is blocked, but pciehp_ist() > > > must ignore link and presence changes caused by Secondary Bus Reset or > > > DPC, and telling those apart takes seconds which cannot be spent in > > > hardirq. > > > > > > Patch 4 does not do that work in hardirq. pciehp_isr() only checks > > > whether the card is present or the link is active, and defers the rest > > > to a work item in process context. The work item does not need to know > > > why the link changed, only whether the card is gone: it waits for DPC > > > recovery or a Secondary Bus Reset in progress to complete, then checks > > > again under reset_lock, and if the card is absent and the link is down > > > marks the devices below disconnected, which schedules the driver's > > > disconnect work from patch 1. pciehp_ist() is unchanged and > > > remains the only consumer of the one-shot flags PCI_DPC_RECOVERED and > > > PCI_LINK_CHANGED, which tell it whether a link change can be ignored. > > > > > > Patches: > > > > > > 1/5 Michael's "PCI: Report surprise removal event" from his RFC v5, > > > which adds disconnect_work_enable and pdev->disconnect_work. > > > Changed to serialize disconnect_work_enable with a per-device > > > spinlock. > > > > > > 2/5 Add pci_hp_wait_link_change(), which awaits a Secondary Bus Reset > > > in progress without consuming PCI_LINK_CHANGED. > > > > > > 3/5 Add pci_dpc_wait_recovery(), which awaits DPC recovery without > > > consuming PCI_DPC_RECOVERED. > > > > > > 4/5 The pciehp change. Adds disconnect_work to struct controller, > > > scheduled from pciehp_isr() on PDC or DLLSC when neither Presence > > > Detect State nor Data Link Layer Link Active indicates a card. > > > how about including the virtio patch? seems more relevant than > fooling around with edu. > > > > 5/5 A POC driver for the QEMU edu device that blocks in remove() > > > waiting for an interrupt, standing in for del_gendisk() stuck in > > > blk_mq_freeze_queue_wait(). Not for merge -- included so the > > > hang can be reproduced. > > > > > > Changes since RFC v3 [5]: > > > > > > - 5/5: Reinitialize the completion in remove() before requesting the > > > delayed interrupt, so that an earlier completion cannot let remove() > > > return while the interrupt is still pending. (Sashiko) > > > - 1/5 to 4/5: No changes. > > > > > > Changes since RFC v2 [4]: > > > > > > - 1/5: Protect disconnect_work_enable with a per-device spinlock, held > > > while testing it and scheduling the work, instead of lockless > > > accesses and barriers. pci_dev_set_disconnected() could otherwise > > > test the flag, get preempted, and queue the work while a newly bound > > > driver re-initializes it. With the lock, cancel_work_sync() is > > > sufficient again, so go back to it from disable_work_sync(). > > > (Sashiko) > > > - 2/5: Test PCI_LINK_CHANGING with test_bit_acquire(), so that the > > > caller's subsequent accesses are ordered after the end of the code > > > section even if wait_event() returns without sleeping. (Sashiko) > > > - 3/5, 4/5, 5/5: No changes. > > > > > > Changes since RFC v1 [2]: > > > > > > - 1/5: Use disable_work_sync() instead of cancel_work_sync() in > > > pci_clear_disconnect_work(), so that a racing schedule_work() cannot > > > queue the work after remove() has returned. (Sashiko) > > > - 2/5, 3/5: New. > > > - 4/5: Drop schedule_notification_work(); pci_dev_set_disconnected() > > > schedules the driver's disconnect work for all callers again. > > > (Michael) > > > - 4/5: Don't consume PCI_DPC_RECOVERED and PCI_LINK_CHANGED in the > > > work item. In v1 it ran the same spurious link change test as > > > pciehp_ist(), and whichever ran first took the flags, so pciehp_ist() > > > could tear down a device that was only reset. (Sashiko) > > > - 4/5: Check presence with pciehp_card_present_or_link_active() in > > > both pciehp_isr() and the work item, as pciehp_ist() does, so that a > > > port with Presence Detect State hardwired to zero is not mistaken > > > for an empty slot. > > > - 4/5: Return early from the work item if pciehp_ist() has already > > > taken the pending events, and treat a read error of the presence > > > check as "not present". (Sashiko) > > > - 4/5: In pciehp_isr(), check presence before dropping the runtime PM > > > reference on the port's parent. In the work item, take a runtime PM > > > reference and check presence under reset_lock, since a slot reset > > > may make Presence Detect State and Link Active flap. > > > - 5/5: Build only with CONFIG_EDU_SRPOC, which depends on PCI; don't > > > claim the interrupt when the device reads all ones; clear bus > > > mastering on teardown. (Sashiko) > > > > > > Testing > > > > > > Reproducing this needs QEMU changes, since neither device_del nor the > > > attention button produces a true surprise removal. A branch with both > > > is here [3]: > > > > > > - a delayed-IRQ register on the edu device (BAR0 0x30, write N ms) > > > - a pcie_surprise_del monitor command that drops the device and > > > generates PDC=1, DLLSC=1, PDS=0 > > > > > > Both tests use: > > > > > > ./qemu-system-aarch64 -machine virt,gic-version=3 -cpu cortex-a57 \ > > > -m 512 -smp 2 -kernel Image -initrd initramfs.cpio.gz \ > > > -device pcie-root-port,id=rp1,chassis=1,slot=1 \ > > > -device edu,bus=rp1,id=edu0 -append "console=ttyAMA0 rdinit=/init" \ > > > -nographic -monitor unix:/tmp/qemu-mon.sock,server,nowait > > > > > > and need a guest kernel with CONFIG_EDU_SRPOC=y. > > > > > > Test 1 (Hang in remove() on a user thread, then surprise removal): > > > > > > guest# echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:01:00.0/remove & > > > host$ echo "pcie_surprise_del edu0" | socat - unix-connect:/tmp/qemu-mon.sock > > > > > > This is the case patch 1 solves on its own: pciehp's IRQ thread is > > > free and handles the removal. > > > > > > Test 2 (Hang in remove() on pciehp's IRQ thread, then surprise removal): > > > > > > guest# echo 0 > /sys/bus/pci/slots/1/power & > > > host$ echo "pcie_surprise_del edu0" | socat - unix-connect:/tmp/qemu-mon.sock > > > > > > Without patch 4 the safe removal does not return until the delayed > > > interrupt fires 600 s later. With it, > > > pciehp_isr() schedules ctrl->disconnect_work, which marks the device > > > disconnected; the POC driver's disconnect work completes the wait and > > > remove() proceeds. > > > > > > Open questions > > > > > > - Is this a viable approach? > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/aHlZE18kPuHuDtTT@wunner.de/ > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260905183905.997833-1-abhinjoses@gmail.com/ > > > [3] https://gitlab.com/abhinkop/qemu/-/commits/suprise-removal > > > [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260927165459.829900-1-abhinjoses@gmail.com/ > > > [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260927175203.928270-1-abhinjoses@gmail.com/ > > > > > > Assisted-by: LLM > > > > > > Abhin Parekadan Jose (4): > > > PCI: pciehp: Add pci_hp_wait_link_change() > > > PCI/DPC: Add pci_dpc_wait_recovery() > > > PCI: pciehp: Report surprise removal from pciehp_isr() > > > misc: Add edu_srpoc surprise removal POC driver > > > > > > Michael S. Tsirkin (1): > > > PCI: Report surprise removal event > > > > > > drivers/misc/Kconfig | 11 ++ > > > drivers/misc/Makefile | 1 + > > > drivers/misc/edu_srpoc.c | 172 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/pci/hotplug/pci_hotplug_core.c | 21 ++- > > > drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp.h | 1 + > > > drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c | 67 ++++++++++ > > > drivers/pci/pci.h | 10 ++ > > > drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 54 ++++++-- > > > drivers/pci/probe.c | 1 + > > > include/linux/pci.h | 57 ++++++++ > > > 10 files changed, 381 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 drivers/misc/edu_srpoc.c > > > > > > > > > base-commit: fd179f8a05be3ccae366b9b96e176b51fbe54aab > > > -- > > > 2.51.1 > > > >