[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190320134632.GA251185@google.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 08:46:32 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
Cc: austin_bolen@...l.com, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
keith.busch@...el.com, Shyam_Iyer@...l.com, lukas@...ner.de,
okaya@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/LINK: bw_notification: Do not leave interrupt
handler NULL
Hi Alexandru,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 08:12:04PM -0500, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> A threaded IRQ with a NULL handler does not work with level-triggered
> interrupts. request_threaded_irq() will return an error:
>
> genirq: Threaded irq requested with handler=NULL and !ONESHOT for irq 16
> pcie_bw_notification: probe of 0000:00:1b.0:pcie010 failed with error -22
>
> For level interrupts we need to silence the interrupt before exiting
> the IRQ handler, so just clear the PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LBMS bit there.
>
> Reported-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
What's your thought regarding Lukas' comment? If you do repost this,
please add a Fixes: tag to help connect this with the initial commit.
If not, I can add the tag myself.
> ---
>
> OOPS! I'm sorry for the noise. Here's the fix.
>
> I was able to test this on edge-triggered interrupts. None of my
> machines have PCIe ports that use level-triggered interrupts. This
> might not be too straightforward to test without a hardware yanker,
> but if there's a way to force a specific interrupt to be level
> triggered, I could do the testing on my end.
>
> drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c | 19 +++++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c
> index d2eae3b7cc0f..001d6253ad48 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c
> @@ -44,11 +44,10 @@ static void pcie_disable_link_bandwidth_notification(struct pci_dev *dev)
> pcie_capability_write_word(dev, PCI_EXP_LNKCTL, lnk_ctl);
> }
>
> -static irqreturn_t pcie_bw_notification_handler(int irq, void *context)
> +static irqreturn_t pcie_bw_notification_irq(int irq, void *context)
> {
> struct pcie_device *srv = context;
> struct pci_dev *port = srv->port;
> - struct pci_dev *dev;
> u16 link_status, events;
> int ret;
>
> @@ -58,6 +57,17 @@ static irqreturn_t pcie_bw_notification_handler(int irq, void *context)
> if (ret != PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL || !events)
> return IRQ_NONE;
>
> + pcie_capability_write_word(port, PCI_EXP_LNKSTA, events);
> + return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
> +}
> +
> +static irqreturn_t pcie_bw_notification_handler(int irq, void *context)
> +{
> + struct pcie_device *srv = context;
> + struct pci_dev *port = srv->port;
> + struct pci_dev *dev;
> + u16 link_status;
> +
> /*
> * Print status from downstream devices, not this root port or
> * downstream switch port.
> @@ -67,8 +77,8 @@ static irqreturn_t pcie_bw_notification_handler(int irq, void *context)
> __pcie_print_link_status(dev, false);
> up_read(&pci_bus_sem);
>
> + pcie_capability_read_word(port, PCI_EXP_LNKSTA, &link_status);
> pcie_update_link_speed(port->subordinate, link_status);
> - pcie_capability_write_word(port, PCI_EXP_LNKSTA, events);
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> @@ -80,7 +90,8 @@ static int pcie_bandwidth_notification_probe(struct pcie_device *srv)
> if (!pcie_link_bandwidth_notification_supported(srv->port))
> return -ENODEV;
>
> - ret = request_threaded_irq(srv->irq, NULL, pcie_bw_notification_handler,
> + ret = request_threaded_irq(srv->irq, pcie_bw_notification_irq,
> + pcie_bw_notification_handler,
> IRQF_SHARED, "PCIe BW notif", srv);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> --
> 2.19.2
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists