[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211008110342.GA1314227@bhelgaas>
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2021 06:03:42 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Kelvin.Cao@...rochip.com
Cc: kurt.schwemmer@...rosemi.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, kelvincao@...look.com,
logang@...tatee.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] PCI/switchtec: Error out MRPC execution when no GAS
access
On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 12:06:18AM +0000, Kelvin.Cao@...rochip.com wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-10-07 at 16:23 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 09:27:49PM +0000, Kelvin.Cao@...rochip.com
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2021-10-06 at 15:20 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 07:00:55PM +0000,
> > > > Kelvin.Cao@...rochip.com
> > > > wrote:
> > > > So wait, you mean you just intentionally ask the firmware to
> > > > reset, knowing that the device will be unusable until the user
> > > > reboots or does a manual rescan? And the way to improve this is
> > > > for the driver to report an error to the user instead of hanging?
> > > > I *guess* that might be some sort of improvement, but seems like
> > > > a
> > > > pretty small one.
> > >
> > > Yes, however, I believe it's something our users really like to
> > > have... With this, they can do their user space
> > > programming/scripting more easily in a synchronous fashion.
> > >
> > > > > - The firwmare crashes and doesn't respond, which normally is
> > > > > the reason for users to issue a firmware reset command to try
> > > > > to recover it via either the driver or a sideband interface.
> > > > > The firmware may not be able to recover by a reset in some
> > > > > extream situations like hardware errors, so that an error
> > > > > return is probably all the users can get before another level
> > > > > of recovery happens.
> > > > >
> > > > > So I'd think this patch is still making the driver better in
> > > > > some way.
> >
> > OK. I still think the fact that all these different mechanisms can
> > reset the device behind your back and make the switch and anything on
> > the other side of it just stop working is ..., well, let's just say
> > it's quite surprising to me.
>
> Actually there're mechanisms like permission control to limit what
> people can do in the firmware, so I guess it's not as bad as it sounds
> like.
> >
> > Well, at least this isn't quite so much a mystery anymore and maybe
> > we
> > can improve the commit log. E.g., maybe something like this:
> >
> > A firmware hard reset may be initiated by various mechanisms
> > including a UART interface, TWI sideband interface from BMC, MRPC
> > command from userspace, etc. The switchtec management driver is
> > unaware of these resets.
> >
> > The reset clears PCI state including the BARs and Memory Space
> > Enable bits, so the device no longer responds to the MMIO accesses
> > the driver uses to operate it.
> >
> > MMIO reads to the device will fail with a PCIe error. When the
> > root
> > complex handles that error, it typically fabricates ~0 data to
> > complete the CPU read.
> >
> > Check for this sort of error by reading the device ID from MMIO
> > space. This ID can never be ~0, so if we see that value, it
> > probably means the PCIe Memory Read failed and we should return an
> > error indication to the application using the switchtec driver.
>
> It looks good to me, the commit log removes the ambiguity. Let me know
> if you prefer a v2 patchset with the updated commit log and naming
> issue fix.
Yes, if you post a v2 of this patch, I'll update my pci/switchtec
branch with it. Thanks for your patience!
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists