[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <66dfc8f83414d_3264629429@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2024 21:20:08 -0700
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, quic_zijuhu
<quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com>, Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>, "Greg
Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Zijun Hu <zijun_hu@...oud.com>
CC: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, Jonathan Cameron
<jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, "Alison
Schofield" <alison.schofield@...el.com>, Vishal Verma
<vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] cxl/region: Find free cxl decoder by
device_for_each_child()
Dan Williams wrote:
[..]
> So I wanted to write a comment here to stop the next person from
> tripping over this dependency on decoder 'add' order, but there is a
> problem. For this simple version to work it needs 3 things:
>
> 1/ decoders are added in hardware id order: done,
> devm_cxl_enumerate_decoders() handles that
>
> 2/ search for decoders in their added order: done, device_find_child()
> guarantees this, although it is not obvious without reading the internals
> of device_add().
>
> 3/ regions are de-allocated from decoders in reverse decoder id order.
> This is not enforced, in fact it is impossible to enforce. Consider that
> any memory device can be removed at any time and may not be removed in
> the order in which the device allocated switch decoders in the topology.
>
> So, that existing comment of needing to enforce ordered allocation is
> still relevant even though the implementation fails to handle the
> out-of-order region deallocation problem.
>
> I alluded to the need for a "tear down the world" implementation back in
> 2022 [1], but never got around to finishing that.
>
> Now, the cxl_port.hdm_end attribute tracks the "last" decoder to be
> allocated for endpoint ports. That same tracking needs to be added for
> switch ports, then this routine could check for ordering constraints by:
>
> /* enforce hardware ordered allocation */
> if (!cxld->region && port->hdm_end + 1 == cxld->id)
> return 1;
> return 0;
>
> As it stands now @hdm_end is never updated for switch ports.
>
> [1]: 176baefb2eb5 cxl/hdm: Commit decoder state to hardware
--- cut the reply here ---
> Yes, that looks simple enough for now, although lets not use a ternary
> condition and lets leave a comment for the next person:
>
> /* decoders are added in hardware id order
> * (devm_cxl_enumerate_decoders), allocated to regions in id order
> * (device_find_child() walks children in 'add' order)
> */
This is garbage I forgot to delete after realizing there was missing
logic to make this simple proposal work in practice.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists