[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <MWHPR11MB1696D14DAC8C5C796C526C4A97340@MWHPR11MB1696.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2020 01:28:50 +0000
From: "Zhao, Haifeng" <haifeng.zhao@...el.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"oohall@...il.com" <oohall@...il.com>,
"ruscur@...sell.cc" <ruscur@...sell.cc>,
"lukas@...ner.de" <lukas@...ner.de>,
"stuart.w.hayes@...il.com" <stuart.w.hayes@...il.com>,
"mr.nuke.me@...il.com" <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>,
"mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com" <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Jia, Pei P" <pei.p.jia@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 4/5] PCI: only return true when dev io state is really
changed
Yes, better !
-----Original Message-----
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Sent: Friday, September 25, 2020 8:38 PM
To: Zhao, Haifeng <haifeng.zhao@...el.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com; oohall@...il.com; ruscur@...sell.cc; lukas@...ner.de; stuart.w.hayes@...il.com; mr.nuke.me@...il.com; mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Jia, Pei P <pei.p.jia@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] PCI: only return true when dev io state is really changed
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 10:34:22PM -0400, Ethan Zhao wrote:
> When uncorrectable error happens, AER driver and DPC driver interrupt
> handlers likely call
> pcie_do_recovery()->pci_walk_bus()->report_frozen_detected() with
> pci_channel_io_frozen the same time.
Call chains are better to read if they split like
foo() ->
bar() ->
baz()
> If pci_dev_set_io_state() return true even if the original state is
> pci_channel_io_frozen, that will cause AER or DPC handler re-enter the
> error detecting and recovery procedure one after another.
> The result is the recovery flow mixed between AER and DPC.
> So simplify the pci_dev_set_io_state() function to only return true
> when dev->error_state is changed.
...
> + if (dev->error_state != new) {
> dev->error_state = new;
> + changed = true;
> + }
> return changed;
Perhaps
if (dev->error_state == new)
return changed;
dev->error_state = new;
return true;
?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists