[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <240932c3-2cf4-5fbd-9cda-520bbd953fa6@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 11:59:29 -0700
From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>,
Ethan Zhao <xerces.zhao@...il.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Sean V Kelley <seanvk.dev@...gontracks.org>,
Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
tony.luck@...el.com, qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com,
linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/15] PCI/RCEC: Add RCiEP's linked RCEC to AER/ERR
On 10/19/20 11:31 AM, Sean V Kelley wrote:
> On 19 Oct 2020, at 3:49, Ethan Zhao wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 6:29 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> [+cc Christoph, Ethan, Sinan, Keith; sorry should have cc'd you to
>>> begin with since you're looking at this code too. Particularly
>>> interested in your thoughts about whether we should be touching
>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS when we don't own AER.]
>>
>> aer_root_reset() function has a prefix 'aer_', looks like it's a
>> function of aer driver, will
>> only be called by aer driver at runtime. if so it's up to the
>> owner/aer to know if OSPM is
>> granted to init. while actually some of the functions and runtime service of
>> aer driver is also shared by GHES driver (running time) and DPC driver
>> (compiling time ?)
>> etc. then it is confused now.
>>
>> Shall we move some of the shared functions and running time service to
>> pci/err.c ?
>> if so , just like pcie_do_recovery(), it's share by firmware_first mode GHES
>> ghes_probe()
>> ->ghes_irq_func
>> ->ghes_proc
>> ->ghes_do_proc()
>> ->ghes_handle_aer()
>> ->aer_recover_work_func()
>> ->pcie_do_recovery()
>> ->aer_root_reset()
>>
>> and aer driver etc. if aer wants to do some access might conflict
>> with firmware(or
>> firmware in embedded controller) should check _OSC_ etc first. blindly issue
>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND or clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS *likely*
>> cause errors by error handling itself.
>
> If _OSC negotiation ends up with FW being in control of AER, that means OS is not in charge and
> should not be messing with AER I guess. That seems appropriate to me then.
But APEI based notification is more like a hybrid approach (frimware first detects the
error and notifies OS). Since spec does not clarify what OS is allowed to do, its bit of a
gray area now. My point is, since firmware allows OS to process the error by sending
the notification, I think its OK to clear the status once the error is handled.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sean
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ethan
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 03:30:37PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>> [+to Jonathan]
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:11:10PM -0700, Sean V Kelley wrote:
>>>>> From: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> When attempting error recovery for an RCiEP associated with an RCEC device,
>>>>> there needs to be a way to update the Root Error Status, the Uncorrectable
>>>>> Error Status and the Uncorrectable Error Severity of the parent RCEC. In
>>>>> some non-native cases in which there is no OS-visible device associated
>>>>> with the RCiEP, there is nothing to act upon as the firmware is acting
>>>>> before the OS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add handling for the linked RCEC in AER/ERR while taking into account
>>>>> non-native cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Co-developed-by: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>
>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201002184735.1229220-12-seanvk.dev@oregontracks.org
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@...el.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>>>>> drivers/pci/pcie/err.c | 20 ++++++++--------
>>>>> 2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> index 65dff5f3457a..083f69b67bfd 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> @@ -1357,27 +1357,50 @@ static int aer_probe(struct pcie_device *dev)
>>>>> */
>>>>> static pci_ers_result_t aer_root_reset(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>>>> {
>>>>> - int aer = dev->aer_cap;
>>>>> + int type = pci_pcie_type(dev);
>>>>> + struct pci_dev *root;
>>>>> + int aer = 0;
>>>>> + int rc = 0;
>>>>> u32 reg32;
>>>>> - int rc;
>>>>>
>>>>> + if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END)
>>>>
>>>> "type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END"
>>>>
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * The reset should only clear the Root Error Status
>>>>> + * of the RCEC. Only perform this for the
>>>>> + * native case, i.e., an RCEC is present.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> + root = dev->rcec;
>>>>> + else
>>>>> + root = dev;
>>>>>
>>>>> - /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> - pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32);
>>>>> - reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> - pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> + if (root)
>>>>> + aer = dev->aer_cap;
>>>>>
>>>>> - rc = pci_bus_error_reset(dev);
>>>>> - pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset\n");
>>>>> + if (aer) {
>>>>> + /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> + pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32);
>>>>> + reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> + pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>
>>>> Not directly related to *this* patch, but my assumption was that in
>>>> the APEI case, the firmware should retain ownership of the AER
>>>> Capability, so the OS should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and
>>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS.
>>>>
>>>> But this code appears to ignore that ownership. Jonathan, you must
>>>> have looked at this recently for 068c29a248b6 ("PCI/ERR: Clear PCIe
>>>> Device Status errors only if OS owns AER"). Do you have any insight
>>>> about this?
>>>>
>>>>> - /* Clear Root Error Status */
>>>>> - pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, ®32);
>>>>> - pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32);
>>>>> + /* Clear Root Error Status */
>>>>> + pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, ®32);
>>>>> + pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32);
>>>>>
>>>>> - /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> - pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32);
>>>>> - reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> - pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> + /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> + pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32);
>>>>> + reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> + pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if ((type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) || (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END)) {
>>>>> + if (pcie_has_flr(root)) {
>>>>> + rc = pcie_flr(root);
>>>>> + pci_info(dev, "has been reset (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>> + }
>>>>> + } else {
>>>>> + rc = pci_bus_error_reset(root);
>>>>
>>>> Don't we want "dev" for both the FLR and pci_bus_error_reset()? I
>>>> think "root == dev" except when dev is an RCiEP. When dev is an
>>>> RCiEP, "root" is the RCEC (if present), and we want to reset the
>>>> RCiEP, not the RCEC.
>>>>
>>>>> + pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>> + }
>>>>
>>>> There are a couple changes here that I think should be split out.
>>>>
>>>> Based on my theory that when firmware retains control of AER, the OS
>>>> should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, and any
>>>> updates to them would have to be done by firmware before we get here,
>>>> I suggested reordering this:
>>>>
>>>> - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>> - do reset
>>>> - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS (for APEI, presumably done by firmware?)
>>>> - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>>
>>>> to this:
>>>>
>>>> - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>> - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS
>>>> - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>> - do reset
>>>>
>>>> If my theory is correct, I think we should still reorder this, but:
>>>>
>>>> - It's a significant behavior change that deserves its own patch so
>>>> we can document/bisect/revert.
>>>>
>>>> - I'm not sure why we clear the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND error reporting
>>>> bits. In the new "clear COMMAND, clear STATUS, enable COMMAND"
>>>> order, it looks superfluous. There's no reason to disable error
>>>> reporting while clearing the status bits.
>>>>
>>>> The current "clear, reset, enable" order suggests that the reset
>>>> might cause errors that we should ignore. I don't know whether
>>>> that's the case or not. It dates from 6c2b374d7485 ("PCI-Express
>>>> AER implemetation: AER core and aerdriver"), which doesn't
>>>> elaborate.
>>>>
>>>> - Should we also test for OS ownership of AER before touching
>>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS?
>>>>
>>>> - If we remove the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND fiddling (and I tentatively
>>>> think we *should* unless we can justify it), that would also
>>>> deserve its own patch. Possibly (1) remove PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND
>>>> fiddling, (2) reorder PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS clearing and reset, (3)
>>>> test for OS ownership of AER (?), (4) the rest of this patch.
>>>>
>>>>> return rc ? PCI_ERS_RESULT_DISCONNECT : PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED;
>>>>> }
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> index 7883c9791562..cbc5abfe767b 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> @@ -148,10 +148,10 @@ static int report_resume(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data)
>>>>>
>>>>> /**
>>>>> * pci_walk_bridge - walk bridges potentially AER affected
>>>>> - * @bridge: bridge which may be a Port, an RCEC with associated RCiEPs,
>>>>> - * or an RCiEP associated with an RCEC
>>>>> - * @cb: callback to be called for each device found
>>>>> - * @userdata: arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback
>>>>> + * @bridge bridge which may be an RCEC with associated RCiEPs,
>>>>> + * or a Port.
>>>>> + * @cb callback to be called for each device found
>>>>> + * @userdata arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback.
>>>>> *
>>>>> * If the device provided is a bridge, walk the subordinate bus, including
>>>>> * any bridged devices on buses under this bus. Call the provided callback
>>>>> @@ -164,8 +164,14 @@ static void pci_walk_bridge(struct pci_dev *bridge,
>>>>> int (*cb)(struct pci_dev *, void *),
>>>>> void *userdata)
>>>>> {
>>>>> + /*
>>>>> + * In a non-native case where there is no OS-visible reporting
>>>>> + * device the bridge will be NULL, i.e., no RCEC, no Downstream Port.
>>>>> + */
>>>>> if (bridge->subordinate)
>>>>> pci_walk_bus(bridge->subordinate, cb, userdata);
>>>>> + else if (bridge->rcec)
>>>>> + cb(bridge->rcec, userdata);
>>>>> else
>>>>> cb(bridge, userdata);
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -194,12 +200,6 @@ pci_ers_result_t pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>>> pci_dbg(bridge, "broadcast error_detected message\n");
>>>>> if (state == pci_channel_io_frozen) {
>>>>> pci_walk_bridge(bridge, report_frozen_detected, &status);
>>>>> - if (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END) {
>>>>> - pci_warn(dev, "subordinate device reset not possible for RCiEP\n");
>>>>> - status = PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE;
>>>>> - goto failed;
>>>>> - }
>>>>> -
>>>>> status = reset_subordinates(bridge);
>>>>> if (status != PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED) {
>>>>> pci_warn(bridge, "subordinate device reset failed\n");
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.28.0
>>>>>
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists