[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <643ddf0869622_1b662946@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 17:06:32 -0700
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>, <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
<vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
<bwidawsk@...nel.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
<dave.jiang@...el.com>, <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <terry.bowman@....com>, <rrichter@....com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 4/6] cxl/pci: Add RCH downstream port error logging
Terry Bowman wrote:
> RCH downstream port error logging is missing in the current CXL driver. The
> missing AER and RAS error logging is needed for communicating driver error
> details to userspace. Update the driver to include PCIe AER and CXL RAS
> error logging.
>
> Add RCH downstream port error handling into the existing RCiEP handler.
> The downstream port error handler is added to the RCiEP error handler
> because the downstream port is implemented in a RCRB, is not PCI
> enumerable, and as a result is not directly accessible to the PCI AER
> root port driver. The AER root port driver calls the RCiEP handler for
> handling RCD errors and RCH downstream port protocol errors.
>
> Update mem.c to include RAS and AER setup. This includes AER and RAS
> capability discovery and mapping for later use in the error handler.
>
> Disable RCH downstream port's root port cmd interrupts.[1]
>
> Update existing RCiEP correctable and uncorrectable handlers to also call
> the RCH handler. The RCH handler will read the RCH AER registers, check for
> error severity, and if an error exists will log using an existing kernel
> AER trace routine. The RCH handler will also log downstream port RAS errors
> if they exist.
I think this patch wants a lead in refactoring to move the existing
probe of the CXL RAS capability into the cxl_port driver so that the RCH
path and the VH path can be unified for register mapping and error
handling invocation. I do not see a compelling rationale to have 2
separate ways to map the RAS capability. The timing of when
cxl_setup_ras() is called looks problematic relative to when the first
error handler callback might happen.
For example what happens when an error fires after cxl_pci has
registered its error handlers, but before the component registers have
been mapped out of the RCRB?
This implies the need for a callback for cxl_pci to notify the cxl_port
driver of CXL errors to handle relative to a PCI AER event.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists