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=-6.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 39CF6C433E2 for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:54:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03BC8619AB for ; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:54:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230160AbhCYRxp (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:53:45 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:38049 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230012AbhCYRxd (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:53:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1616694812; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=U1H8oTsuCNr5IakugS+/TqfCXZkTIreW1N+AcUUq/qc=; b=NqN+suOosMri1brQq1vr+NqtAELWm/0FBxzDM8q87M7v88b5JJZ1hO8WjPuKJYsgHSM5ln lMGhd0UHUZyi3sWvsyzcynCDmGkrJosCTknUKC2ejc1v5tUs+1pmvvJqqmNvcziWk4I5wn 0zo57BT65XHlT0kpM5p7/T5fvCs0gJM= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-588-v-j_lQJVMIOFBD5ZcxVrag-1; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 13:53:28 -0400 X-MC-Unique: v-j_lQJVMIOFBD5ZcxVrag-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79C0D801FD8; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omen.home.shazbot.org (ovpn-112-120.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.112.120]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EB0C5C260; Thu, 25 Mar 2021 17:53:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 11:53:24 -0600 From: Alex Williamson To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" , Amey Narkhede , raphael.norwitz@nutanix.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, alay.shah@nutanix.com, suresh.gumpula@nutanix.com, shyam.rajendran@nutanix.com, felipe@nutanix.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] PCI/sysfs: Allow userspace to query and set device reset mechanism Message-ID: <20210325115324.046ddca8@omen.home.shazbot.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20210320085942.3cefcc48@x1.home.shazbot.org> <20210322111003.50d64f2c@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210324083743.791d6191@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210324111729.702b3942@omen.home.shazbot.org> <20210325085504.051e93f2@omen.home.shazbot.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 18:09:58 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote: > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 08:55:04AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 10:37:54 +0200 > > Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 11:17:29AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 17:13:56 +0200 > > > > Leon Romanovsky wrote: > > > > > > <...> > > > > > > > > Yes, and real testing/debugging almost always requires kernel rebuild. > > > > > Everything else is waste of time. > > > > > > > > Sorry, this is nonsense. Allowing users to debug issues without a full > > > > kernel rebuild is a good thing. > > > > > > It is far from debug, this interface doesn't give you any answers why > > > the reset didn't work, it just helps you to find the one that works. > > > > > > Unless you believe that this information will be enough to understand > > > the root cause, you will need to ask from the user to perform extra > > > tests, maybe try some quirk. All of that requires from the users to > > > rebuild their kernel. > > > > > > So no, it is not debug. > > > > It allows a user to experiment to determine (a) my device doesn't work > > in a given scenario with the default configuration, but (b) if I change > > the reset to this other thing it does work. That is a step in > > debugging. > > > > It's absurd to think that a sysfs attribute could provide root cause, > > but it might be enough for someone to further help that user. It would > > be a useful clue for a bug report. Yes, reaching root cause might > > involve building a kernel, but that doesn't invalidate that having a > > step towards debugging in the base kernel might be a useful tool. > > Let's agree to do not agree. > > > > > > > > > > > For policy preference, I already described how I've configured QEMU to > > > > > > > > prefer a bus reset rather than a PM reset due to lack of specification > > > > > > > > regarding the scope of a PM "soft reset". This interface would allow a > > > > > > > > system policy to do that same thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think anyone is suggesting this as a means to avoid quirks that > > > > > > > > would resolve reset issues and create the best default general behavior. > > > > > > > > This provides a mechanism to test various reset methods, and thereby > > > > > > > > identify broken methods, and set a policy. Sure, that policy might be > > > > > > > > to avoid a broken reset in the interim before it gets quirked and > > > > > > > > there's potential for abuse there, but I think the benefits outweigh > > > > > > > > the risks. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This interface is proposed as first class citizen in the general sysfs > > > > > > > layout. Of course, it will be seen as a way to bypass the kernel. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At least, put it under CONFIG_EXPERT option, so no distro will enable it > > > > > > > by default. > > > > > > > > > > > > Of course we're proposing it to be accessible, it should also require > > > > > > admin privileges to modify, sysfs has lots of such things. If it's > > > > > > relegated to non-default accessibility, it won't be used for testing > > > > > > and it won't be available for system policy and it's pointless. > > > > > > > > > > We probably have difference in view of what testing is. I expect from > > > > > the users who experience issues with reset to do extra steps and one of > > > > > them is to require from them to compile their kernel. > > > > > > > > I would define the ability to generate a CI test that can pick a > > > > device, unbind it from its driver, and iterate reset methods as a > > > > worthwhile improvement in testing. > > > > > > Who is going to run this CI? At least all kernel CIs (external and > > > internal to HW vendors) that I'm familiar are building kernel themselves. > > > > > > Distro kernel is too bloat to be really usable for CI. > > > > At this point I'm suspicious you're trolling. A distro kernel CI > > certainly uses the kernel they intend to ship and support in their > > environment. You're concerned about a bloated kernel, but the proposal > > here adds 2-bytes per device to track reset methods and a trivial array > > in text memory, meanwhile you're proposing multiple per-device memory > > allocations to enhance the feature you think is too bloated for CI. > > I don't know why you decided to focus on memory footprint which is not > important at all during CI runs. The bloat is in Kconfig options that > are not needed. Those extra options add significant overhead during > builds and runs itself. > > And not, I'm not trolling, but representing HW vendor that pushes its CI > and developers environment to the limit, by running full kernel builds with > less than 30 seconds and boot-to-test with less than 6 seconds for full > Fedora VM. CI is only one aspect where I think this interface could be useful, as below there's also a policy use case. Therefore my inclination is that this would be included in default kernels and avoiding bloat is a good thing. A CI environment can be used in different ways, it's not necessarily building a new kernel for every test, nor do typical users have access to those types of environments to report information in a bug. > > > > > The root permissions doesn't protect from anything, SO lovers will use > > > > > root without even thinking twice. > > > > > > > > Yes, with great power comes great responsibility. Many admins ignore > > > > this. That's far beyond the scope of this series. > > > > > > <...> > > > > > > > > I'm trying to help you with your use case of providing reset policy > > > > > mechanism, which can be without CONFIG_EXPERT. However if you want > > > > > to continue path of having specific reset type only, please ensure > > > > > that this is not taken to the "bypass kernel" direction. > > > > > > > > You've lost me, are you saying you'd be in favor of an interface that > > > > allows an admin to specify an arbitrary list of reset methods because > > > > that's somehow more in line with a policy choice than a userspace > > > > workaround? This seems like unnecessary bloat because (a) it allows > > > > the same bypass mechanism, and (b) a given device is only going to use > > > > a single method anyway, so the functionality is unnecessary. Please > > > > help me understand how this favors the policy use case. Thanks, > > > > > > The policy decision is global logic that is easier to grasp. At some > > > point of our discussion, you presented the case where PM reset is not > > > defined well and you prefer to do bus reset (something like that). > > > > > > I expect that QEMU sets same reset policy for all devices at the same > > > time instead of trying per-device to guess which one works. > > > > > > And yes, you will be able to bypass kernel, but at least this interface > > > will be broader than initial one that serves only SO and workarounds. > > > > I still think allocating objects for a list and managing that list is > > too bloated and complicated, but I agree that being able to have more > > fine grained control could be useful. Is it necessary to be able to > > re-order reset methods or might it still be better aligned to a policy > > use case if we allow plus and minus operators? For example, a device > > might list: > > > > [pm] [bus] > > > > Indicating that PM and bus reset are both available and enabled. The > > user could do: > > > > echo -pm > reset_methods > > > > This would result in: > > > > pm [bus] > > > > Indicating that both PM and bus resets are available, but only bus reset > > is enabled (note this is the identical result to "echo bus >" in the > > current proposal). "echo +pm" or "echo default" could re-enable the PM > > reset. Would something like that be satisfactory? > > Yes, I actually imagined simpler interface: > To set specific type: > echo pm > reset_methods > To set policy: > echo "pm,bus" > reset_methods > > But your proposal is nicer. The above doesn't support re-ordering though, we'll need to parse a comma separated list for that. > > If we need to allow re-ording, we'd want to use a byte-array where each > > byte indicates a type of reset and perhaps a non-zero value in the > > array indicates the method is enabled and the value indicates priority. > > For example writing "dev_spec,flr,bus" would parse to write 1 to the > > byte associated with the device specific reset, 2 to flr, 3 to bus > > reset, then we'd process low to high (or maybe starting at a high value > > to count down to zero might be more simple). We could do that with > > only adding less than a fixed 8-bytes per device and no dynamic > > allocation. Thoughts? Thanks, > > Like I suggested, linked list will be easier and the reset will be > something like: > for_each_reset_type(device, type) { > switch (type) { > case PM: > ret = do_some_reset(device); > break; > case BUS: > ..... > } > if (!ret || ret == -ENOMEM) <-- go to next type in linked list > return ret; > } Perhaps Bjorn has some thoughts, but I don't like the dynamic memory allocation and list management required for a linked list. Once bus & slot reset are combined, I think we're talking about potentially 5 reset methods, so if we had: const struct pci_reset_fn_method pci_reset_fn_methods[] = { { .reset_fn = &pci_dev_specific_reset, .name = "device_specific" }, { .reset_fn = &pcie_flr, .name = "flr" }, { .reset_fn = &pci_af_flr, .name = "af_flr" }, { .reset_fn = &pci_pm_reset, .name = "pm" }, { .reset_fn = &pci_reset_bus_function, .name = "bus" }, }; The pci_dev could include u8 reset_methods[ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods)]; And we could loop as: u8 prio; for (prio = ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); prio; prio--) { int i; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); i++) { if (dev->reset_methods[i] == prio) { ret = pci_reset_fn_methods[i].reset_fn(dev, probe); if (ret != -ENOTTY) return ret; break; } } if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods)) break; } return -ENOTTY; The sysfs _store function would probably do something like: u8 reset_methods[ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods)] = { 0 }; u8 prio = ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); for each @string in comma separated list from user... { int i; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); i++) { if (!strcmp(@string, pci_reset_fn_methods[i].name)) { reset_methods[i] = prio--; break; } } if (i == ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods)) return -EINVAL; } memcpy(dev->reset_methods, reset_methods, sizeof(reset_methods)); The probe would also need to fill the array in a compatible way: u8 reset_methods[ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods)] = { 0 }; u8 prio = ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); int i; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(pci_reset_fn_methods); i++) { int ret = pci_reset_fn_methods[i].reset_fn(dev, 1); if (!ret) reset_methods[i] = prio--; else if (ret != -ENOTTY) break; } memcpy(dev->reset_methods, reset_methods, sizeof(reset_methods)); Thanks, Alex