linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: windy Bi <windy.bi.enflame@gmail.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: Fix no-op wait after secondary bus reset
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 11:00:42 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGdb+H00q3xhCfw-x+DG624sMuuKqaRwRpPWDJCYs2iLsBCyVw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220519110622.6fd065d2.alex.williamson@redhat.com>

On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 1:06 AM Alex Williamson
<alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2022 19:54:32 +0800
> Sheng Bi <windy.bi.enflame@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset() triggers SBR followed by 1 second sleep,
> > and then uses pci_dev_wait() for waiting device ready. The dev parameter
> > passes to the wait function is currently the bridge itself, but not the
> > device been reset.
> >
> > If we call pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset() to trigger SBR to a device,
> > there is 1 second sleep but not waiting device ready, since the bridge
> > is always ready while resetting downstream devices. pci_dev_wait() here
> > is a no-op actually. This would be risky in the case which the device
> > becomes ready after more than 1 second, especially while hotplug enabled.
> > The late coming hotplug event after 1 second will trigger hotplug module
> > to remove/re-insert the device.
> >
> > Instead of waiting ready of bridge itself, changing to wait all the
> > downstream devices become ready with timeout PCIE_RESET_READY_POLL_MS
> > after SBR, considering all downstream devices are affected during SBR.
> > Once one of the devices doesn't reappear within the timeout, return
> > -ENOTTY to indicate SBR doesn't complete successfully.
> >
> > Fixes: 6b2f1351af56 ("PCI: Wait for device to become ready after secondary bus reset")
> > Signed-off-by: Sheng Bi <windy.bi.enflame@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pci/pci.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > index eb7c0a08ff57..32b7a5c1fa3a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > @@ -5049,6 +5049,34 @@ void pci_bridge_wait_for_secondary_bus(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >       }
> >  }
> >
> > +static int pci_bridge_secondary_bus_wait(struct pci_dev *bridge, int timeout)
> > +{
> > +     struct pci_dev *dev;
> > +     int delay = 0;
> > +
> > +     if (!bridge->subordinate || list_empty(&bridge->subordinate->devices))
> > +             return 0;
> > +
> > +     list_for_each_entry(dev, &bridge->subordinate->devices, bus_list) {
> > +             while (!pci_device_is_present(dev)) {
> > +                     if (delay > timeout) {
> > +                             pci_warn(dev, "not ready %dms after secondary bus reset; giving up\n",
> > +                                     delay);
> > +                             return -ENOTTY;
> > +                     }
> > +
> > +                     msleep(20);
> > +                     delay += 20;
>
> Your previous version used the same exponential back-off as used in
> pci_dev_wait(), why the change here to poll at 20ms intervals?  Thanks,
>
> Alex

Many thanks for your time. The change is to get a more accurate
timeout, to align with
previous statement "we shouldn't incur any extra delay once timeout has passed".
Previous binary exponential back-off incurred probable unexpected
extra delay, like
60,000 ms timeout but actual 65,535 ms, and the difference probably
goes worse by
timeout setting changes. Thanks,

windy

>
> > +             }
> > +
> > +             if (delay > 1000)
> > +                     pci_info(dev, "ready %dms after secondary bus reset\n",
> > +                             delay);
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >  void pci_reset_secondary_bus(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >  {
> >       u16 ctrl;
> > @@ -5092,7 +5120,7 @@ int pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >  {
> >       pcibios_reset_secondary_bus(dev);
> >
> > -     return pci_dev_wait(dev, "bus reset", PCIE_RESET_READY_POLL_MS);
> > +     return pci_bridge_secondary_bus_wait(dev, PCIE_RESET_READY_POLL_MS);
> >  }
> >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_bridge_secondary_bus_reset);
> >
> >
> > base-commit: 617c8a1e527fadaaec3ba5bafceae7a922ebef7e
>

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-20  3:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-16 17:30 [PATCH] drivers/pci: wait downstream hierarchy ready instead of slot itself ready, after secondary bus reset windy.bi.enflame
2022-05-16 20:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-05-16 22:57   ` Alex Williamson
2022-05-17 14:56     ` windy Bi
2022-05-18 11:54     ` [PATCH v2] PCI: Fix no-op wait " Sheng Bi
2022-05-19 17:06       ` Alex Williamson
2022-05-20  3:00         ` windy Bi [this message]
2022-05-20  6:41       ` Lukas Wunner
2022-05-21  8:36         ` Sheng Bi
2022-05-21 12:49           ` Lukas Wunner
2022-05-21 17:37             ` Sheng Bi
2022-05-23 14:20               ` Lukas Wunner
2022-05-23 15:59                 ` Sheng Bi
2022-05-23 17:15                   ` [PATCH v3] " Sheng Bi
2022-06-08 13:16                     ` Sheng Bi
2022-06-08 15:23                     ` Lukas Wunner
2022-05-17  5:34 ` [PATCH] drivers/pci: wait downstream hierarchy ready instead of slot itself ready, " kernel test robot

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGdb+H00q3xhCfw-x+DG624sMuuKqaRwRpPWDJCYs2iLsBCyVw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=windy.bi.enflame@gmail.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).