The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>
To: "Marek Marczykowski-Górecki" <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
	Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>,
	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
	"moderated list:XEN HYPERVISOR INTERFACE" 
	<xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] xen-pciback: Consider INTx disabled when MSI/MSI-X is enabled
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 11:05:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZSz8xu8E9-02Ej8D@macbook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221118154931.1928298-1-marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>

On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 04:49:23PM +0100, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> Linux enables MSI-X before disabling INTx, but keeps MSI-X masked until
> the table is filled. Then it disables INTx just before clearing MASKALL
> bit. Currently this approach is rejected by xen-pciback.
> According to the PCIe spec, device cannot use INTx when MSI/MSI-X is
> enabled (in other words: enabling MSI/MSI-X implicitly disables INTx).
> 
> Change the logic to consider INTx disabled if MSI/MSI-X is enabled. This
> applies to three places:
>  - checking currently enabled interrupts type,
>  - transition to MSI/MSI-X - where INTx would be implicitly disabled,
>  - clearing INTx disable bit - which can be allowed even if MSI/MSI-X is
>    enabled, as device should consider INTx disabled anyway in that case

Is this last point strictly needed?  From the description above it
seems Linux only cares about enabling MSI(-X) without the disable INTx
bit set.

> 
> Fixes: 5e29500eba2a ("xen-pciback: Allow setting PCI_MSIX_FLAGS_MASKALL too")
> Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
>  - allow clearing INTx regardless of MSI/MSI-X state, to be consistent
>    with enabling MSI/MSI-X
> Changes in v2:
>  - restructure the patch to consider not only MASKALL bit, but enabling
>    MSI/MSI-X generally, without explicitly disabling INTx first
> ---
>  drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c          | 19 +++++++++++------
>  .../xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_capability.c   |  3 ++-
>  drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_header.c   | 21 +++----------------
>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c
> index 059de92aea7d..d47eee6c5143 100644
> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space.c
> @@ -288,12 +288,6 @@ int xen_pcibk_get_interrupt_type(struct pci_dev *dev)
>  	u16 val;
>  	int ret = 0;
>  
> -	err = pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &val);
> -	if (err)
> -		return err;
> -	if (!(val & PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE))
> -		ret |= INTERRUPT_TYPE_INTX;
> -
>  	/*
>  	 * Do not trust dev->msi(x)_enabled here, as enabling could be done
>  	 * bypassing the pci_*msi* functions, by the qemu.
> @@ -316,6 +310,19 @@ int xen_pcibk_get_interrupt_type(struct pci_dev *dev)
>  		if (val & PCI_MSIX_FLAGS_ENABLE)
>  			ret |= INTERRUPT_TYPE_MSIX;
>  	}

Since we are explicitly hiding INTx now, should we also do something
about MSI(X) being both enabled at the same time?  The spec states:

"System configuration software sets one of these bits to enable either
MSI or MSI-X, but never both simultaneously. Behavior is undefined if
both MSI and MSI-X are enabled simultaneously."

So finding both MSI and MSI-X enabled likely means something has gone
very wrong?  Likely to be done in a separate change, just realized
while looking at the patch context.

> +
> +	/*
> +	 * PCIe spec says device cannot use INTx if MSI/MSI-X is enabled,
> +	 * so check for INTx only when both are disabled.
> +	 */
> +	if (!ret) {
> +		err = pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &val);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +		if (!(val & PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE))
> +			ret |= INTERRUPT_TYPE_INTX;
> +	}
> +
>  	return ret ?: INTERRUPT_TYPE_NONE;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_capability.c b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_capability.c
> index 097316a74126..eb4c1af44f5c 100644
> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_capability.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/conf_space_capability.c
> @@ -236,10 +236,11 @@ static int msi_msix_flags_write(struct pci_dev *dev, int offset, u16 new_value,
>  		return PCIBIOS_SET_FAILED;
>  
>  	if (new_value & field_config->enable_bit) {
> -		/* don't allow enabling together with other interrupt types */
> +		/* don't allow enabling together with other interrupt type */

This comment needs to be adjusted to note that we allow enabling while
INTx is not disabled in the command register, in order to please
Linuxes MSI(-X) startup sequence.

FWIW, another option would be to simply disable INTX here once MSI(-X)
is attempted to be enabled, won't that avoid having to modify
xen_pcibk_get_interrupt_type()?

Thanks, Roger.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-10-16  9:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-18 15:49 [PATCH v3] xen-pciback: Consider INTx disabled when MSI/MSI-X is enabled Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2022-11-18 20:46 ` Jason Andryuk
2022-11-18 21:46   ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2022-11-19 14:36     ` Jason Andryuk
2022-11-19 16:33       ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2022-11-21 15:41         ` Jason Andryuk
2022-11-21 16:16           ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2022-11-28 13:44             ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2022-11-30 19:40               ` Jason Andryuk
2023-09-27 10:33 ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2023-10-16  6:16 ` Juergen Gross
2023-10-16  9:05 ` Roger Pau Monné [this message]
2023-10-16 13:04   ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2023-10-16 13:29     ` Roger Pau Monné

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=ZSz8xu8E9-02Ej8D@macbook \
    --to=roger.pau@citrix.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=jgross@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com \
    --cc=oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com \
    --cc=sstabellini@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