From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Ethan Zhao <haifeng.zhao@linux.intel.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, baolu.lu@linux.intel.com,
dwmw2@infradead.org, will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com,
lukas@wunner.de, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 4/5] iommu/vt-d: don't issue device-TLB invalidate request when device is disconnected
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2023 07:11:51 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231227131151.GA1499234@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231227025923.536148-5-haifeng.zhao@linux.intel.com>
I suggest using "ATS Invalidate Request" in the subject as well.
Otherwise we have to figure out whether "device-TLB invalidate
request" is the same as "ATS Invalidate Request".
If they are the same, just use the same words.
On Tue, Dec 26, 2023 at 09:59:22PM -0500, Ethan Zhao wrote:
> Except those aggressive hotplug cases - surprise remove a hotplug device
> while its safe removal is requested and handled in process by:
>
> 1. pull it out directly.
> 2. turn off its power.
> 3. bring the link down.
> 4. just died there that moment.
>
> etc, in a word, 'gone' or 'disconnected'.
>
> Mostly are regular normal safe removal and surprise removal unplug.
> these hot unplug handling process could be optimized for fix the ATS
> invalidation hang issue by calling pci_dev_is_disconnected() in function
> devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid() to check target device state to avoid
> sending meaningless ATS invalidation request to iommu when device is gone.
> (see IMPLEMENTATION NOTE in PCIe spec r6.1 section 10.3.1)
Suggest "ATS Invalidate Request", capitalized exactly that way so we
know it's a specific name of something defined in the PCIe spec.
> For safe removal, device wouldn't be removed untill the whole software
> handling process is done, it wouldn't trigger the hard lock up issue
> caused by too long ATS invalidation timeout wait. in safe removal path,
Ditto.
Capitalize "In the safe removal ..." since it starts a new sentence.
> device state isn't set to pci_channel_io_perm_failure in
> pciehp_unconfigure_device() by checking 'presence' parameter, calling
> pci_dev_is_disconnected() in devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid() will return
> false there, wouldn't break the function.
>
> For surprise removal, device state is set to pci_channel_io_perm_failure in
> pciehp_unconfigure_device(), means device is already gone (disconnected)
> call pci_dev_is_disconnected() in devtlb_invalidation_with_pasid() will
> return true to break the function not to send ATS invalidation request to
Ditto.
> the disconnected device blindly, thus avoid the further long time waiting
> triggers the hard lockup.
>
> safe removal & surprise removal
>
> pciehp_ist()
> pciehp_handle_presence_or_link_change()
> pciehp_disable_slot()
> remove_board()
> pciehp_unconfigure_device(presence)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-27 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-27 2:59 [RFC PATCH v8 0/5] fix vt-d hard lockup when hotplug ATS capable device Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 2:59 ` [RFC PATCH v8 1/5] iommu/vt-d: add flush_target_dev member to struct intel_iommu and pass device info to all ATS invalidation functions Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 2:59 ` [RFC PATCH v8 2/5] iommu/vt-d: break out device-TLB invalidation if target device is gone Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 2:59 ` [RFC PATCH v8 3/5] PCI: make pci_dev_is_disconnected() helper public for other drivers Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 2:59 ` [RFC PATCH v8 4/5] iommu/vt-d: don't issue device-TLB invalidate request when device is disconnected Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 13:11 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2023-12-27 23:31 ` Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 2:59 ` [RFC PATCH v8 5/5] iommu/vt-d: don't loop for timeout device-TLB invalidation request forever Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 3:03 ` Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 3:11 ` Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 3:05 ` [RFC PATCH v8 0/5] fix vt-d hard lockup when hotplug ATS capable device Ethan Zhao
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-12-27 3:09 Ethan Zhao
2023-12-27 3:09 ` [RFC PATCH v8 4/5] iommu/vt-d: don't issue device-TLB invalidate request when device is disconnected 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=20231227131151.GA1499234@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=haifeng.zhao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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