linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 10/20] cxl/pci: Introduce config option PCIEAER

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <21fa3d41-3585-40b4-b919-d3b66557e9d8@amd.com>
Date:   Mon, 9 Oct 2023 09:44:19 -0500
From:   Terry Bowman <Terry.Bowman@....com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
        Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>
Cc:     Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Ben Widawsky <bwidawsk@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 10/20] cxl/pci: Introduce config option PCIEAER_CXL

Hi Jonathan,

I added responses inline below.

On 10/2/23 09:46, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2023 17:43:29 +0200
> Robert Richter <rrichter@....com> wrote:
> 
>> CXL error handling depends on AER.
>>
>> Introduce config option PCIEAER_CXL in preparation of the AER dport
>> error handling. Also, introduce the stub function
>> devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport() to setup dports.
>>
>> This is in preparation of follow on patches.
>>
>> Note the Kconfg part of the option is added in a later patch to enable
>> it once coding of the feature is complete.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>
> 
> Feels like it should just be combined with a later patch that fills
> some of this in as on it's own it's just a weird snippet of code :)
> 

We will look to merge with the following patch.

> Still, one comment inline anyway.
> 
> 
>> ---
>>  drivers/cxl/core/pci.c | 9 +++++++++
>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h      | 7 +++++++
>>  drivers/cxl/mem.c      | 2 ++
>>  3 files changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
>> index c7a7887ebdcf..6ba3b7370816 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
>> @@ -718,6 +718,15 @@ static bool cxl_report_and_clear(struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds)
>>  	return true;
>>  }
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCIEAER_CXL
>> +
>> +void devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport(struct device *host, struct cxl_dport *dport)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport, CXL);
>> +
>> +#endif
>> +
>>  pci_ers_result_t cxl_error_detected(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>  				    pci_channel_state_t state)
>>  {
>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> index c07064e0c136..cfa2f6bede41 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> @@ -704,6 +704,13 @@ struct cxl_dport *devm_cxl_add_rch_dport(struct cxl_port *port,
>>  					 struct device *dport_dev, int port_id,
>>  					 resource_size_t rcrb);
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PCIEAER_CXL
>> +void devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport(struct device *host, struct cxl_dport *dport);
>> +#else
>> +static inline void devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport(struct device *host,
>> +					       struct cxl_dport *dport) { }
>> +#endif
>> +
>>  struct cxl_decoder *to_cxl_decoder(struct device *dev);
>>  struct cxl_root_decoder *to_cxl_root_decoder(struct device *dev);
>>  struct cxl_switch_decoder *to_cxl_switch_decoder(struct device *dev);
>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/mem.c b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
>> index 04107058739b..61ca21c020fa 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/mem.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/mem.c
>> @@ -157,6 +157,8 @@ static int cxl_mem_probe(struct device *dev)
>>  	else
>>  		endpoint_parent = &parent_port->dev;
>>  
>> +	devm_cxl_setup_parent_dport(dev, dport);
> 
> devm calls can always fail (because if nothing else you have to register
> some cleanup and that involves an allocation.  If you want to ignore
> that I'd expect a comment here.
> 

We will add error handling here.

Regards,
Terry

>> +
>>  	device_lock(endpoint_parent);
>>  	if (!endpoint_parent->driver) {
>>  		dev_err(dev, "CXL port topology %s not enabled\n",
>