From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2D4EC433E8 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A78D82075A for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 12:24:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728423AbgG0MYS (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 08:24:18 -0400 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([185.176.76.210]:2535 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728292AbgG0MYS (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 08:24:18 -0400 Received: from lhreml710-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 50336B258D4D68A1850D; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:24:16 +0100 (IST) Received: from localhost (10.52.121.176) by lhreml710-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:24:15 +0100 Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:22:52 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Sean V Kelley CC: , , , , , , , Qiuxu Zhuo Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 7/9] PCI/AER: Add RCEC AER handling Message-ID: <20200727132252.0000644c@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20200724172223.145608-8-sean.v.kelley@intel.com> References: <20200724172223.145608-1-sean.v.kelley@intel.com> <20200724172223.145608-8-sean.v.kelley@intel.com> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.4 (GTK+ 2.24.32; i686-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.52.121.176] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhreml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.53) To lhreml710-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.61) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:22:21 -0700 Sean V Kelley wrote: > The Root Complex Event Collectors(RCEC) appear as peers to Root Ports > and also have the AER capability. So add RCEC support to the current AER > service driver and attach the AER service driver to the RCEC device. > > Co-developed-by: Qiuxu Zhuo > Signed-off-by: Sean V Kelley > Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo A few questions and comments for this patch. See inline. Jonathan > --- > drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c | 34 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c > index f1bf06be449e..7cc430c74c46 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ int pci_aer_raw_clear_status(struct pci_dev *dev) > return -EIO; > > port_type = pci_pcie_type(dev); > - if (port_type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT) { > + if (port_type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT || port_type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) { > pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, &status); > pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, status); > } > @@ -389,6 +389,12 @@ void pci_aer_init(struct pci_dev *dev) > pci_add_ext_cap_save_buffer(dev, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_ERR, sizeof(u32) * n); > > pci_aer_clear_status(dev); > + > + if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) { > + if (!pci_find_ext_capability(dev, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_RCEC)) > + return; > + pci_info(dev, "AER: RCEC CAP FOUND and cap_has_rtctl = %d\n", n); It feels like failing to find an RC_EC extended cap in a RCEC deserved a nice strong error message. Perhaps this isn't the right place to do it though. For that matter, why are we checking for it here? > + } > } > > void pci_aer_exit(struct pci_dev *dev) > @@ -577,7 +583,8 @@ static umode_t aer_stats_attrs_are_visible(struct kobject *kobj, > if ((a == &dev_attr_aer_rootport_total_err_cor.attr || > a == &dev_attr_aer_rootport_total_err_fatal.attr || > a == &dev_attr_aer_rootport_total_err_nonfatal.attr) && It is a bit ugly to have these called rootport_total_err etc for the rcec. Perhaps we should just add additional attributes to reflect we are looking at an RCEC? > - pci_pcie_type(pdev) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT) > + ((pci_pcie_type(pdev) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT) && > + (pci_pcie_type(pdev) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC))) > return 0; > > return a->mode; > @@ -894,7 +901,10 @@ static bool find_source_device(struct pci_dev *parent, > if (result) > return true; > > - pci_walk_bus(parent->subordinate, find_device_iter, e_info); > + if (pci_pcie_type(parent) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) > + pcie_walk_rcec(parent, find_device_iter, e_info); > + else > + pci_walk_bus(parent->subordinate, find_device_iter, e_info); > > if (!e_info->error_dev_num) { > pci_info(parent, "can't find device of ID%04x\n", e_info->id); > @@ -1030,6 +1040,7 @@ int aer_get_device_error_info(struct pci_dev *dev, struct aer_err_info *info) > if (!(info->status & ~info->mask)) > return 0; > } else if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT || > + pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC || > pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_DOWNSTREAM || > info->severity == AER_NONFATAL) { > > @@ -1182,6 +1193,8 @@ static int set_device_error_reporting(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data) > int type = pci_pcie_type(dev); > > if ((type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT) || > + (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) || > + (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END) || Why add RC_END here? > (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_UPSTREAM) || > (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_DOWNSTREAM)) { > if (enable) > @@ -1206,9 +1219,11 @@ static void set_downstream_devices_error_reporting(struct pci_dev *dev, > { > set_device_error_reporting(dev, &enable); > > - if (!dev->subordinate) > - return; > - pci_walk_bus(dev->subordinate, set_device_error_reporting, &enable); > + if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) > + pcie_walk_rcec(dev, set_device_error_reporting, &enable); > + else if (dev->subordinate) > + pci_walk_bus(dev->subordinate, set_device_error_reporting, &enable); > + > } > > /** > @@ -1306,6 +1321,11 @@ static int aer_probe(struct pcie_device *dev) > struct device *device = &dev->device; > struct pci_dev *port = dev->port; > > + /* Limit to Root Ports or Root Complex Event Collectors */ > + if ((pci_pcie_type(port) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) && > + (pci_pcie_type(port) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT)) > + return -ENODEV; > + > rpc = devm_kzalloc(device, sizeof(struct aer_rpc), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!rpc) > return -ENOMEM; > @@ -1362,7 +1382,7 @@ static pci_ers_result_t aer_root_reset(struct pci_dev *dev) > > static struct pcie_port_service_driver aerdriver = { > .name = "aer", > - .port_type = PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT, > + .port_type = PCIE_ANY_PORT, Why this particular change? Seems that is a lot wider than simply adding RCEC. Obviously we'll then drop out in the aer_probe but it is still rather inelegant. > .service = PCIE_PORT_SERVICE_AER, > > .probe = aer_probe,