From: Roland Dreier <roland@topspin.com>
To: long <tlnguyen@snoqualmie.dp.intel.com>
Cc: ak@muc.de, akpm@osdl.org, greg@kroah.com, jgarzik@pobox.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tom.l.nguyen@intel.com,
zwane@linuxpower.ca, eli@mellanox.co.il
Subject: Re: [PATCH]2.6.7 MSI-X Update
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 09:50:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <523c4mi5gy.fsf@topspin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200406222148.i5MLmA4Y001949@snoqualmie.dp.intel.com> (long's message of "Tue, 22 Jun 2004 14:48:10 -0700")
OK, yet another comment on this update :)
Overall I like the idea of separating MSI and MSI-X support and
getting rid of the msi_alloc_vectors()/msi_free_vectors(). However it
seems there is a slight asymmetry in how MSI-X is handled now.
If a driver calls pci_enable_msix() (and the call succeeds), then the
device is immediately put into MSI-X mode -- that is, the enable bit
of its MSI-X capability is set. However, this bit will not be cleared
until the driver calls free_irq() for the last MSI-X vector.
This means that for a driver to clear the MSI-X enable bit, it must
first do request_irq() on all the vectors it was assigned and then
call free_irq(). It seems quite possible to me that a driver may not
use all the MSI-X vectors it is assigned, so device cleanup becomes a
problem. Also, there is no way for the driver to free its unused
MSI-X vectors.
It seems we need a pci_disable_msix() call to match the
pci_enable_msix() call. (And remove the disabling of MSI-X from the
free_irq code path)
I guess there is actually a similar problem with MSI -- if a driver
calls pci_enable_msi(), MSI will not be disabled until the driver does
request_irq/free_irq. This is not quite as serious because a driver
is unlikely not to use the since MSI vector it gets, but it is still a
problem for error cleanup paths. So maybe we need pci_disable_msi()
as well.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Roland
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-23 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-22 21:48 [PATCH]2.6.7 MSI-X Update long
2004-06-22 23:57 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-23 0:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-06-23 1:18 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-23 3:45 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-23 16:50 ` Roland Dreier [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-06-22 23:06 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-06-23 16:49 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-06-23 16:58 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-06-23 22:03 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-06-24 1:42 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-24 6:37 ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2004-06-24 7:27 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-24 16:29 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-06-26 1:21 long
2004-06-26 0:30 ` [PATCH]2.6.7 " Roland Dreier
2004-06-26 1:38 ` Roland Dreier
2004-06-26 8:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-06-26 17:30 ` Roland Dreier
2004-07-13 22:02 long
2004-07-15 2:14 ` [PATCH]2.6.7 " Roland Dreier
2004-07-18 1:25 ` Roland Dreier
2004-07-15 15:46 Nguyen, Tom L
2004-07-19 15:36 Nguyen, Tom L
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=523c4mi5gy.fsf@topspin.com \
--to=roland@topspin.com \
--cc=ak@muc.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=eli@mellanox.co.il \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tlnguyen@snoqualmie.dp.intel.com \
--cc=tom.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=zwane@linuxpower.ca \
/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