linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Alex G <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, helgaas@kernel.org,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, austin_bolen@dell.com,
	alex_gagniuc@dellteam.com, keith.busch@intel.com,
	Shyam_Iyer@Dell.com, lukas@wunner.de, okaya@kernel.org,
	torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/LINK: Account for BW notification in vector calculation
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:34:08 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190423093408.16b07efc@x1.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <84300da7-9bbd-4f32-c7fa-23724db60b88@gmail.com>

On Tue, 23 Apr 2019 09:33:53 -0500
Alex G <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 4/22/19 7:33 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Apr 2019 19:05:57 -0500
> > Alex G <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com> wrote:  
> >> echo 0000:07:00.0:pcie010 |
> >> sudo tee /sys/bus/pci_express/drivers/pcie_bw_notification/unbind  
> > 
> > That's a bad solution for users, this is meaningless tracking of a
> > device whose driver is actively managing the link bandwidth for power
> > purposes.   
> 
> 0.5W savings on a 100+W GPU? I agree it's meaningless.

Evidence?  Regardless, I don't have control of the driver that's making
these changes, but the claim seems unfounded and irrelevant.
 
> > There is nothing wrong happening here that needs to fill
> > logs.  I thought maybe if I enabled notification of autonomous
> > bandwidth changes that it might categorize these as something we could
> > ignore, but it doesn't.
> > How can we identify only cases where this is
> > an erroneous/noteworthy situation?  Thanks,  
> 
> You don't. Ethernet doesn't. USB doesn't. This logging behavior is 
> consistent with every other subsystem that deals with multi-speed links. 
> I realize some people are very resistant to change (and use very ancient 
> kernels). I do not, however, agree that this is a sufficient argument to 
> dis-unify behavior.

Sorry, I don't see how any of this is relevant either.  Clearly I'm
using a recent kernel or I wouldn't be seeing this new bandwidth
notification driver.  I'm assigning a device to a VM whose driver is
power managing the device via link speed changes.  The result is that
we now see irrelevant spam in the host dmesg for every inconsequential
link downgrade directed by the device.  I can see why we might want to
be notified of degraded links due to signal issues, but what I'm
reporting is that there are also entirely normal and benign reasons
that a link might be reduced, we can't seem to tell the difference
between a fault and this normal dynamic scaling, and the assumption of
a fault is spamming dmesg.  So, I don't think what we have here is well
cooked.  Do drivers have a mechanism to opt-out of this error
reporting?  Can drivers register an anticipated link change to avoid
the spam?  What instructions can we *reasonably* give to users as to
when these messages mean something, when they don't, any how they can
be turned off?  Thanks,

Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-23 15:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-22 22:43 Alex Williamson
2019-04-23  0:05 ` Alex G
2019-04-23  0:33   ` Alex Williamson
2019-04-23 14:33     ` Alex G
2019-04-23 15:34       ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2019-04-23 15:49         ` Lukas Wunner
2019-04-23 16:03         ` Alex G
2019-04-23 16:22           ` Alex Williamson
2019-04-23 16:27             ` Alex G
2019-04-23 16:37               ` Alex Williamson
2019-04-23 17:10       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-04-23 17:53         ` Alex G
2019-04-23 18:38           ` Alex Williamson
2019-04-23 17:59 ` Alex G
2019-05-01 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas

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=20190423093408.16b07efc@x1.home \
    --to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=Shyam_Iyer@Dell.com \
    --cc=alex_gagniuc@dellteam.com \
    --cc=austin_bolen@dell.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=mr.nuke.me@gmail.com \
    --cc=okaya@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] PCI/LINK: Account for BW notification in vector calculation' \
    /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

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).