[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221122195316.GC20515@wunner.de>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:53:16 +0100
From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
To: ira.weiny@...el.com
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Gregory Price <gregory.price@...verge.com>,
"Li, Ming" <ming4.li@...el.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] PCI/DOE: Remove the pci_doe_flush_mb() call
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 07:53:23AM -0800, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> Each struct doe_mb is managed as part of the PCI device. They can't go
> away as long as the PCI device exists. pci_doe_flush_mb() was set up to
> flush the workqueue and prevent any further submissions to the mailboxes
> when the PCI device goes away. Unfortunately, this was fundamentally
> flawed. There was no guarantee that a struct doe_mb remained after
> pci_doe_flush_mb() returned. Therefore, the doe_mb state could be
> invalid when those threads waiting on the workqueue were flushed.
>
> Fortunately the current code is safe because all callers make a
> synchronous call to pci_doe_submit_task() and maintain a reference on the
> PCI device.
>
> For these reasons, pci_doe_flush_mb() will never be called while tasks
> are being processed and there is no use for it.
Going forward my plan is to allocate all existing DOE mailboxes
of a device upon enumeration. That will allow concurrent use
of a mailbox by multiple drivers.
When a pci_dev goes away, say, because it's been hot-removed,
we need a way to abort all ongoing DOE exchanges.
pci_doe_flush_mb() seems to do just that so I'm not sure why
it's being removed?
Thanks,
Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists