All of lore.kernel.org
 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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.