From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:37912 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754576AbdCGEHX (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Mar 2017 23:07:23 -0500 Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 18:24:17 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: "Raj, Ashok" Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Keith Busch Subject: Re: [PATCH] pciehp: Fix race condition handling surprise link-down Message-ID: <20170307002417.GA21358@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> References: <1481317564-18045-1-git-send-email-ashok.raj@intel.com> <20170203025901.GA15080@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> <20170203060053.GA240323@otc-nc-03> <20170203165104.GC15080@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20170203165104.GC15080@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 10:51:04AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 10:00:53PM -0800, Raj, Ashok wrote: > > ... > > Just to summarize, we only queue the POWEROFF due to surprise link down > > and another POWERON due to link becoming back up. The transient link-down > > events are coveniently ignored. > > I'm leery about ignoring events, though it happens to be convenient in > this case. I think we're ignoring them because we're running work > items simultaneously with other items, and I think that concurrency is > unnecessary complexity. > > I think it would be safer to queue every event and process every event > serially. Hi Ashok, Just a ping to make sure we're not deadlocked. I'm waiting for you, so I hope you're not also waiting for me :) I'm not trying to rush you; I just don't want to drop this by mistake. Bjorn