From: Dan Williams <email@example.com> To: Bjorn Helgaas <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: email@example.com, Linux PCI <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Linux ACPI <email@example.com>, "Weiny, Ira" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Vishal L Verma <email@example.com>, "Schofield, Alison" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Ben Widawsky <email@example.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <email@example.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Matthew Wilcox <email@example.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 7/8] cxl/port: Introduce cxl_port objects Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 10:18:44 -0700 Message-ID: <CAPcyv4iQjePCpsG=SxZ-pbHuCX9cxVZtBzyYKVstNowUQg7WPQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4hAc=DERr1z8kr=V01+NSi74f-kSfMAdeArLmVb112_Dw@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 7:13 PM Dan Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > > Hi Bjorn, thanks for taking a look. > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 3:42 PM Bjorn Helgaas <email@example.com> wrote: > > > > [+cc Greg, Rafael, Matthew: device model questions] > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 07:31:20AM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > Once the cxl_root is established then other ports in the hierarchy can > > > be attached. The cxl_port object, unlike cxl_root that is associated > > > with host bridges, is associated with PCIE Root Ports or PCIE Switch > > > Ports. Add cxl_port instances for all PCIE Root Ports in an ACPI0016 > > > host bridge. > > > > I'm not a device model expert, but I'm not sure about adding a new > > /sys/bus/cxl/devices hierarchy. I'm under the impression that CXL > > devices will be enumerated by the PCI core as PCIe devices. > > Yes, PCIe is involved, but mostly only for the CXL.io slow path > (configuration and provisioning via mailbox) when we're talking about > memory expander devices (CXL calls these Type-3). So-called "Type-3" > support is the primary driver of this infrastructure. > > You might be thinking of CXL accelerator devices that will look like > plain PCIe devices that happen to participate in the CPU cache > hierarchy (CXL calls these Type-1). There will also be accelerator > devices that want to share coherent memory with the system (CXL calls > these Type-2). > > The infrastructure being proposed here is primarily for the memory > expander (Type-3) device case where the PCI sysfs hierarchy is wholly > unsuited for modeling it. A single CXL memory region device may span > multiple endpoints, switches, and host bridges. It poses similar > stress to an OS device model as RAID where there is a driver for the > component contributors to an upper level device / driver that exposes > the RAID Volume (CXL memory region interleave set). The CXL memory > decode space (HDM: Host Managed Device Memory) is independent of the > PCIe MMIO BAR space. > > That's where the /sys/bus/cxl hierarchy is needed, to manage the HDM > space across the CXL topology in a way that is foreign to PCIE (HDM > Decoder hierarchy). > > > Doesn't > > that mean we will have one struct device in the pci_dev, and another > > one in the cxl_port? > > Yes, that is the proposal. > > > That seems like an issue to me. More below. > > hmm... > > > > > > The cxl_port instances for PCIE Switch Ports are not > > > included here as those are to be modeled as another service device > > > registered on the pcie_port_bus_type. > > > > I'm hesitant about the idea of adding more uses of pcie_port_bus_type. > > I really dislike portdrv because it makes a parallel hierarchy: > > > > /sys/bus/pci > > /sys/bus/pci_express > > > > for things that really should not be different. There's a struct > > device in pci_dev, and potentially several pcie_devices, each with > > another struct device. We make these pcie_device things for AER, DPC, > > hotplug, etc. E.g., > > > > /sys/bus/pci/devices/0000:00:1c.0 > > /sys/bus/pci_express/devices/0000:00:1c.0:pcie002 # AER > > /sys/bus/pci_express/devices/0000:00:1c.0:pcie010 # BW notification > > > > These are all the same PCI device. AER is a PCI capability. > > Bandwidth notification is just a feature of all Downstream Ports. I > > think it makes zero sense to have extra struct devices for them. From > > a device point of view (enumeration, power management, VM assignment), > > we can't manage them separately from the underlying PCI device. For > > example, we have three separate "power/" directories, but obviously > > there's only one point of control (00:1c.0): > > > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1c.0/power/ > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1c.0/0000:00:1c.0:pcie002/power/ > > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1c.0/0000:00:1c.0:pcie010/power/ > > The superfluous power/ issue can be cleaned up with > device_set_pm_not_required(). > > What are the other problems this poses, because in other areas this > ability to subdivide a device's functionality into sub-drivers is a > useful organization principle? So much so that several device writer > teams came together to create the auxiliary-bus for the purpose of > allowing sub-drivers to be carved off for independent functionality > similar to the portdrv organization. > Bjorn, any further thoughts on this? This port architecture question is in the critical path for the next phase of CXL development (targeting v5.14 not v5.13).
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-04-01 14:30 [PATCH v2 0/8] CXL Port Enumeration Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h Dan Williams 2021-04-06 16:38 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-14 0:18 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-14 0:42 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-14 9:21 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] cxl/mem: Introduce 'struct cxl_regs' for "composable" CXL devices Dan Williams 2021-04-06 17:00 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-14 0:40 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] cxl/core: Rename bus.c to core.c Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] cxl/core: Refactor CXL register lookup for bridge reuse Dan Williams 2021-04-06 17:00 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-15 20:53 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] cxl/acpi: Introduce ACPI0017 driver and cxl_root Dan Williams 2021-04-01 21:34 ` kernel test robot 2021-04-06 17:32 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-15 15:00 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] cxl/Kconfig: Default drivers to CONFIG_CXL_BUS Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] cxl/port: Introduce cxl_port objects Dan Williams 2021-04-06 17:44 ` Jonathan Cameron 2021-04-08 22:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2021-04-09 2:13 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-13 17:18 ` Dan Williams [this message] 2021-04-14 1:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2021-04-15 5:21 ` Dan Williams 2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] cxl/acpi: Add module parameters to stand in for ACPI tables Dan Williams
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='CAPcyv4iQjePCpsG=SxZ-pbHuCX9cxVZtBzyYKVstNowUQg7WPQ@mail.gmail.com' \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ --email@example.com \ --firstname.lastname@example.org \ /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
Linux-ACPI Archive on lore.kernel.org Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi/0 linux-acpi/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 linux-acpi linux-acpi/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-acpi \ email@example.com public-inbox-index linux-acpi Example config snippet for mirrors Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-acpi AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git