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=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 5FFE7C43441 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 17:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2914B213A2 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 17:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="JlBb8Ms9" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2914B213A2 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390994AbeKTD5K (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 22:57:10 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56894 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390242AbeKTD5K (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 22:57:10 -0500 Received: from [10.80.45.159] (unknown [71.69.156.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DB4F8213A2; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 17:32:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1542648764; bh=f5jXAEtHIW0yHUGhIlpB1DKM3MCKC1MibrxuM8Dd4ic=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=JlBb8Ms9VxyBOyewAMmc5qnS7DgUfZBgNld6DhG+rEJ+V8UnX6dCABPA3KMsqqfDW zGtnyl6CDzb3Hae01ad9WzxZmIQo6nqPXRckLbraUfmEAeMlwWiq5gasMJDg+ffYwU zeFR52OBnRyCQmFb0NniC9n4NC2NFfwajjFzgFO0= Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] PCI/AER: Consistently use _OSC to determine who owns AER To: Keith Busch , Tyler Baicar Cc: mr.nuke.me@gmail.com, helgaas@google.com, austin_bolen@dell.com, alex_gagniuc@dellteam.com, Shyam_Iyer@dell.com, lukas@wunner.de, bhelgaas@google.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, lenb@kernel.org, ruscur@russell.cc, sbobroff@linux.ibm.com, oohall@gmail.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org References: <20181115231605.24352-1-mr.nuke.me@gmail.com> <20181119165318.GB26595@localhost.localdomain> From: Sinan Kaya Message-ID: <74f2c527-0890-5e14-5e2d-48934a42dae6@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 12:32:42 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181119165318.GB26595@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On 11/19/2018 11:53 AM, Keith Busch wrote: > On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:53:05AM -0500, Tyler Baicar wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 8:49 PM Sinan Kaya wrote: >>> >>> On 11/15/2018 3:16 PM, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote: >>>> I've asked around a few people at Dell and they unanimously agree that >>>> _OSC is the correct way to determine ownership of AER. In linux, we >>>> use the result of _OSC to enable AER services, but we use HEST to >>>> determine AER ownership. That's inconsistent. This series drops the >>>> use of HEST in favor of _OSC. >>>> >>>> [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/15/62 >>> >>> This change breaks the existing systems that rely on the HEST table >>> telling the operating system about firmware first presence. >>> >>> Besides, HEST table has much more granularity about which PCI component >>> needs firmware such as global/device/switch. >>> >>> You should probably circulate these ideas for wider consumption in UEFI >>> forum as UEFI owns the HEST table definition. >> >> I agree with Sinan, this will break existing systems, and the granularity of the >> HEST definition is more useful than the single bit in _OSC. > > But we're not using HEST as a fine grain control. We disable native AER > handling if *any* device has FF set in HEST, and that just forces people > to use pcie_ports=native to get around that. > I don't see *any* in the code. aer_hest_parse() does the HEST table parsing. It switches to firmware first mode if global flag in HEST is set. Otherwise for each BDF in device, hest_match_pci() is used to do a cross-matching against HEST table contents. Am I missing something?