Linux-PCI Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan"  <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
To: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>,
	Ethan Zhao <xerces.zhao@gmail.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	Sean V Kelley <seanvk.dev@oregontracks.org>,
	Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	tony.luck@intel.com, qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com,
	linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>,
	Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/15] PCI/RCEC: Add RCiEP's linked RCEC to AER/ERR
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 11:59:29 -0700
Message-ID: <240932c3-2cf4-5fbd-9cda-520bbd953fa6@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F54EEC0-3933-4A2E-87BC-23FABECB0C0A@intel.com>


On 10/19/20 11:31 AM, Sean V Kelley wrote:
> On 19 Oct 2020, at 3:49, Ethan Zhao wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 6:29 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> [+cc Christoph, Ethan, Sinan, Keith; sorry should have cc'd you to
>>> begin with since you're looking at this code too. Particularly
>>> interested in your thoughts about whether we should be touching
>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS when we don't own AER.]
>>
>> aer_root_reset() function has a prefix  'aer_', looks like it's a
>> function of aer driver, will
>> only be called by aer driver at runtime. if so it's up to the
>> owner/aer to know if OSPM is
>> granted to init. while actually some of the functions and runtime service of
>> aer driver is also shared by GHES driver (running time) and DPC driver
>> (compiling time ?)
>> etc. then it is confused now.
>>
>> Shall we move some of the shared functions and running time service to
>> pci/err.c ?
>> if so , just like pcie_do_recovery(), it's share by firmware_first  mode GHES
>> ghes_probe()
>> ->ghes_irq_func
>>   ->ghes_proc
>>     ->ghes_do_proc()
>>       ->ghes_handle_aer()
>>         ->aer_recover_work_func()
>>           ->pcie_do_recovery()
>>             ->aer_root_reset()
>>
>> and aer driver etc.  if aer wants to do some access might conflict
>> with firmware(or
>> firmware in embedded controller) should check _OSC_ etc first. blindly issue
>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND  or clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS *likely*
>> cause errors by error handling itself.
>
> If _OSC negotiation ends up with FW being in control of AER, that means OS is not in charge and 
> should not be messing with AER I guess. That seems appropriate to me then.
But APEI based notification is more like a hybrid approach (frimware first detects the
error and notifies OS). Since spec does not clarify what OS is allowed to do, its bit of a
gray area now. My point is, since firmware allows OS to process the error by sending
the notification, I think its OK to clear the status once the error is handled.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sean
>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ethan
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 03:30:37PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>> [+to Jonathan]
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:11:10PM -0700, Sean V Kelley wrote:
>>>>> From: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> When attempting error recovery for an RCiEP associated with an RCEC device,
>>>>> there needs to be a way to update the Root Error Status, the Uncorrectable
>>>>> Error Status and the Uncorrectable Error Severity of the parent RCEC.  In
>>>>> some non-native cases in which there is no OS-visible device associated
>>>>> with the RCiEP, there is nothing to act upon as the firmware is acting
>>>>> before the OS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add handling for the linked RCEC in AER/ERR while taking into account
>>>>> non-native cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> Co-developed-by: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>
>>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201002184735.1229220-12-seanvk.dev@oregontracks.org
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sean V Kelley <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>  drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>>>>>  drivers/pci/pcie/err.c | 20 ++++++++--------
>>>>>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> index 65dff5f3457a..083f69b67bfd 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c
>>>>> @@ -1357,27 +1357,50 @@ static int aer_probe(struct pcie_device *dev)
>>>>>   */
>>>>>  static pci_ers_result_t aer_root_reset(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>>>>  {
>>>>> -   int aer = dev->aer_cap;
>>>>> +   int type = pci_pcie_type(dev);
>>>>> +   struct pci_dev *root;
>>>>> +   int aer = 0;
>>>>> +   int rc = 0;
>>>>>     u32 reg32;
>>>>> -   int rc;
>>>>>
>>>>> +   if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END)
>>>>
>>>> "type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END"
>>>>
>>>>> +           /*
>>>>> +            * The reset should only clear the Root Error Status
>>>>> +            * of the RCEC. Only perform this for the
>>>>> +            * native case, i.e., an RCEC is present.
>>>>> +            */
>>>>> +           root = dev->rcec;
>>>>> +   else
>>>>> +           root = dev;
>>>>>
>>>>> -   /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, &reg32);
>>>>> -   reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> +   if (root)
>>>>> +           aer = dev->aer_cap;
>>>>>
>>>>> -   rc = pci_bus_error_reset(dev);
>>>>> -   pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset\n");
>>>>> +   if (aer) {
>>>>> +           /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, &reg32);
>>>>> +           reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>
>>>> Not directly related to *this* patch, but my assumption was that in
>>>> the APEI case, the firmware should retain ownership of the AER
>>>> Capability, so the OS should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and
>>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS.
>>>>
>>>> But this code appears to ignore that ownership.  Jonathan, you must
>>>> have looked at this recently for 068c29a248b6 ("PCI/ERR: Clear PCIe
>>>> Device Status errors only if OS owns AER").  Do you have any insight
>>>> about this?
>>>>
>>>>> -   /* Clear Root Error Status */
>>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, &reg32);
>>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32);
>>>>> +           /* Clear Root Error Status */
>>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, &reg32);
>>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32);
>>>>>
>>>>> -   /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, &reg32);
>>>>> -   reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> +           /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */
>>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, &reg32);
>>>>> +           reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK;
>>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32);
>>>>> +   }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +   if ((type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) || (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END)) {
>>>>> +           if (pcie_has_flr(root)) {
>>>>> +                   rc = pcie_flr(root);
>>>>> +                   pci_info(dev, "has been reset (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>> +           }
>>>>> +   } else {
>>>>> +           rc = pci_bus_error_reset(root);
>>>>
>>>> Don't we want "dev" for both the FLR and pci_bus_error_reset()?  I
>>>> think "root == dev" except when dev is an RCiEP.  When dev is an
>>>> RCiEP, "root" is the RCEC (if present), and we want to reset the
>>>> RCiEP, not the RCEC.
>>>>
>>>>> +           pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset (%d)\n", rc);
>>>>> +   }
>>>>
>>>> There are a couple changes here that I think should be split out.
>>>>
>>>> Based on my theory that when firmware retains control of AER, the OS
>>>> should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, and any
>>>> updates to them would have to be done by firmware before we get here,
>>>> I suggested reordering this:
>>>>
>>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>>   - do reset
>>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS (for APEI, presumably done by firmware?)
>>>>   - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>>
>>>> to this:
>>>>
>>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS
>>>>   - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK
>>>>   - do reset
>>>>
>>>> If my theory is correct, I think we should still reorder this, but:
>>>>
>>>>   - It's a significant behavior change that deserves its own patch so
>>>>     we can document/bisect/revert.
>>>>
>>>>   - I'm not sure why we clear the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND error reporting
>>>>     bits.  In the new "clear COMMAND, clear STATUS, enable COMMAND"
>>>>     order, it looks superfluous.  There's no reason to disable error
>>>>     reporting while clearing the status bits.
>>>>
>>>>     The current "clear, reset, enable" order suggests that the reset
>>>>     might cause errors that we should ignore.  I don't know whether
>>>>     that's the case or not.  It dates from 6c2b374d7485 ("PCI-Express
>>>>     AER implemetation: AER core and aerdriver"), which doesn't
>>>>     elaborate.
>>>>
>>>>   - Should we also test for OS ownership of AER before touching
>>>>     PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS?
>>>>
>>>>   - If we remove the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND fiddling (and I tentatively
>>>>     think we *should* unless we can justify it), that would also
>>>>     deserve its own patch.  Possibly (1) remove PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND
>>>>     fiddling, (2) reorder PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS clearing and reset, (3)
>>>>     test for OS ownership of AER (?), (4) the rest of this patch.
>>>>
>>>>>     return rc ? PCI_ERS_RESULT_DISCONNECT : PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED;
>>>>>  }
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> index 7883c9791562..cbc5abfe767b 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c
>>>>> @@ -148,10 +148,10 @@ static int report_resume(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data)
>>>>>
>>>>>  /**
>>>>>   * pci_walk_bridge - walk bridges potentially AER affected
>>>>> - * @bridge:        bridge which may be a Port, an RCEC with associated RCiEPs,
>>>>> - *         or an RCiEP associated with an RCEC
>>>>> - * @cb:            callback to be called for each device found
>>>>> - * @userdata:      arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback
>>>>> + * @bridge   bridge which may be an RCEC with associated RCiEPs,
>>>>> + *           or a Port.
>>>>> + * @cb       callback to be called for each device found
>>>>> + * @userdata arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback.
>>>>>   *
>>>>>   * If the device provided is a bridge, walk the subordinate bus, including
>>>>>   * any bridged devices on buses under this bus.  Call the provided callback
>>>>> @@ -164,8 +164,14 @@ static void pci_walk_bridge(struct pci_dev *bridge,
>>>>>                         int (*cb)(struct pci_dev *, void *),
>>>>>                         void *userdata)
>>>>>  {
>>>>> +   /*
>>>>> +    * In a non-native case where there is no OS-visible reporting
>>>>> +    * device the bridge will be NULL, i.e., no RCEC, no Downstream Port.
>>>>> +    */
>>>>>     if (bridge->subordinate)
>>>>>             pci_walk_bus(bridge->subordinate, cb, userdata);
>>>>> +   else if (bridge->rcec)
>>>>> +           cb(bridge->rcec, userdata);
>>>>>     else
>>>>>             cb(bridge, userdata);
>>>>>  }
>>>>> @@ -194,12 +200,6 @@ pci_ers_result_t pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>>>     pci_dbg(bridge, "broadcast error_detected message\n");
>>>>>     if (state == pci_channel_io_frozen) {
>>>>>             pci_walk_bridge(bridge, report_frozen_detected, &status);
>>>>> -           if (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END) {
>>>>> -                   pci_warn(dev, "subordinate device reset not possible for RCiEP\n");
>>>>> -                   status = PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE;
>>>>> -                   goto failed;
>>>>> -           }
>>>>> -
>>>>>             status = reset_subordinates(bridge);
>>>>>             if (status != PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED) {
>>>>>                     pci_warn(bridge, "subordinate device reset failed\n");
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> 2.28.0
>>>>>
-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer


  reply index

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-16  0:10 [PATCH v9 00/15] Add RCEC handling to PCI/AER Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:10 ` [PATCH v9 01/15] PCI/RCEC: Add RCEC class code and extended capability Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 02/15] PCI/RCEC: Bind RCEC devices to the Root Port driver Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 03/15] PCI/RCEC: Cache RCEC capabilities in pci_init_capabilities() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 04/15] PCI/ERR: Rename reset_link() to reset_subordinates() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 05/15] PCI/ERR: Simplify by using pci_upstream_bridge() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 06/15] PCI/ERR: Simplify by computing pci_pcie_type() once Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 07/15] PCI/ERR: Use "bridge" for clarity in pcie_do_recovery() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 08/15] PCI/ERR: Avoid negated conditional for clarity Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 09/15] PCI/ERR: Add pci_walk_bridge() to pcie_do_recovery() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16 17:19   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 10/15] PCI/ERR: Limit AER resets in pcie_do_recovery() Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16 17:22   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-16 17:36     ` Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 11/15] PCI/RCEC: Add pcie_link_rcec() to associate RCiEPs Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 12/15] PCI/RCEC: Add RCiEP's linked RCEC to AER/ERR Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16 20:30   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-16 22:29     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-17  0:28       ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
2020-10-17  1:45       ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
2020-10-19 10:49       ` Ethan Zhao
2020-10-19 18:31         ` Sean V Kelley
2020-10-19 18:59           ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan [this message]
2020-10-19 20:50             ` Sean V Kelley
2020-10-20 12:59               ` Jonathan Cameron
2020-10-20 16:28                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-17 16:14     ` Sean V Kelley
2020-10-19 19:07       ` Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 13/15] PCI/AER: Add pcie_walk_rcec() to RCEC AER handling Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 14/15] PCI/PME: Add pcie_walk_rcec() to RCEC PME handling Sean V Kelley
2020-10-16  0:11 ` [PATCH v9 15/15] PCI/AER: Add RCEC AER error injection support Sean V Kelley

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=240932c3-2cf4-5fbd-9cda-520bbd953fa6@linux.intel.com \
    --to=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=okaya@kernel.org \
    --cc=qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com \
    --cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
    --cc=sean.v.kelley@intel.com \
    --cc=seanvk.dev@oregontracks.org \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=xerces.zhao@gmail.com \
    /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-PCI Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/0 linux-pci/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-pci linux-pci/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci \
		linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-pci

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-pci


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git