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=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 8B501C35249 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 01:56:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48E6B20679 for ; Mon, 3 Feb 2020 01:56:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="FoJy5s+V" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726971AbgBCB4d (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:56:33 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f196.google.com ([209.85.167.196]:45770 "EHLO mail-oi1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726670AbgBCB4d (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Feb 2020 20:56:33 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f196.google.com with SMTP id v19so13229851oic.12; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 17:56:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Y2BAnnFqBl0ny/UG9avlBqD34L7kMVfx2OwCIBjO+No=; b=FoJy5s+Vjtqt/WYVTotJ9W30/xIwYF5UOfD1EF1k00/rJrpmxqRc1Bdgs9qIIq96io EEsFWCmUVy3Mh3bWYC2PJsZ39kvh27XWIeCYkoeFXUJNO1Zojs9ymuhSJSURGu1k4Mv7 GsJOoQtAM1nDrGuNGr4Bjq3VA/WK5kPoBUCFBsaMXAVau9lwZ8mOW4YrOx1YQ+jeoV85 L9gx0hMd0CZpKuCq/GXlKilrgn10beOVARaqJXqscJwMdVDwQOjwnvTy6I5KYBRX+2BH MKxlIrk2vZqgW8sDDB0FHxKY+IuQa76EoBlAhp8/AZ2zjDxfDb848Vyx/O+WTwEZMvv5 WBbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Y2BAnnFqBl0ny/UG9avlBqD34L7kMVfx2OwCIBjO+No=; b=Q1nepnNUixWiTeLDtwVJn/0HEYo1uXCOZKss1Fo2Ib+hBVU2lsCdk4sMbWmwThAPJY NrnKj3npMZyEUjWr/cT6vR7YwbBVX2JyNG/wYxyHZ9mOmDFzmJ9ZNlEPyS0ZrMFZS3H6 uWgQnzvdLqrOrNANLEbxJ2GKFmKeYqdqPUKf0Eiuh0Dbm3m25ukXtw5r9sfnuyxojbRZ 8kJNZvcabgorduny7IcQEUd72AKGHNMZppqkPMgU94jqiYILfvCX4mbtpQZP05QPv0+m Gf9I1q86S9Kr++tLld7r4WlXmS+MCJaKO/aiVqEAXIBDqtIaDP0p8b7sXn51x3nf5/vx 4FfA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXJ8CYglsD6ecUZuwnW+J2oVAEOnfktXoZNDe8fJZKwQVt/tyqI Uu4M64ykoCXFc1so1gXkQQjTVqYOxkezkMgLIfz8Yw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzYVyWHsYbCf5iLnzCcMJtqYB3/GbQNuRQPHhRjiyDYYPVMb0DwR8G40Oj0GaXrMl+kxGk3cEi4DfsSo7xVb/4= X-Received: by 2002:aca:d502:: with SMTP id m2mr12708577oig.41.1580694992545; Sun, 02 Feb 2020 17:56:32 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200120023326.GA149019@google.com> <8409fd7ad6b83da75c914a71accf522953a460a0.camel@pengutronix.de> In-Reply-To: <8409fd7ad6b83da75c914a71accf522953a460a0.camel@pengutronix.de> From: Dave Airlie Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 11:56:20 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Issues with "PCI/LINK: Report degraded links via link bandwidth notification" To: Lucas Stach , Alex Deucher , Ben Skeggs Cc: "Alex G." , Bjorn Helgaas , Alexandru Gagniuc , Keith Busch , Jens Axboe , Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , David Airlie , Daniel Vetter , Jan Vesely , Lukas Wunner , Alex Williamson , Austin Bolen , Shyam Iyer , Sinan Kaya , Linux PCI , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 21 Jan 2020 at 21:11, Lucas Stach wrote: > > On Mo, 2020-01-20 at 10:01 -0600, Alex G. wrote: > > > > On 1/19/20 8:33 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > [+cc NVMe, GPU driver folks] > > > > > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 04:10:08PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > I think we have a problem with link bandwidth change notifications > > > > (see https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/pcie/bw_notification.c). > > > > > > > > Here's a recent bug report where Jan reported "_tons_" of these > > > > notifications on an nvme device: > > > > https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206197 > > > > > > > > There was similar discussion involving GPU drivers at > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190429185611.121751-2-helgaas@kernel.org > > > > > > > > The current solution is the CONFIG_PCIE_BW config option, which > > > > disables the messages completely. That option defaults to "off" (no > > > > messages), but even so, I think it's a little problematic. > > > > > > > > Users are not really in a position to figure out whether it's safe to > > > > enable. All they can do is experiment and see whether it works with > > > > their current mix of devices and drivers. > > > > > > > > I don't think it's currently useful for distros because it's a > > > > compile-time switch, and distros cannot predict what system configs > > > > will be used, so I don't think they can enable it. > > > > > > > > Does anybody have proposals for making it smarter about distinguishing > > > > real problems from intentional power management, or maybe interfaces > > > > drivers could use to tell us when we should ignore bandwidth changes? > > > > > > NVMe, GPU folks, do your drivers or devices change PCIe link > > > speed/width for power saving or other reasons? When CONFIG_PCIE_BW=y, > > > the PCI core interprets changes like that as problems that need to be > > > reported. > > > > > > If drivers do change link speed/width, can you point me to where > > > that's done? Would it be feasible to add some sort of PCI core > > > interface so the driver could say "ignore" or "pay attention to" > > > subsequent link changes? > > > > > > Or maybe there would even be a way to move the link change itself into > > > the PCI core, so the core would be aware of what's going on? > > > > Funny thing is, I was going to suggest an in-kernel API for this. > > * Driver requests lower link speed 'X' > > * Link management interrupt fires > > * If link speed is at or above 'X' then do not report it. > > I think an "ignore" flag would defeat the purpose of having link > > bandwidth reporting in the first place. If some drivers set it, and > > others don't, then it would be inconsistent enough to not be useful. > > > > A second suggestion is, if there is a way to ratelimit these messages on > > a per-downstream port basis. > > Both AMD and Nvidia GPUs have embedded controllers, which are > responsible for the power management. IIRC those controllers can > autonomously initiate PCIe link speed changes depending on measured bus > load. So there is no way for the driver to signal the requested bus > speed to the PCIe core. > > I guess for the GPU usecase the best we can do is to have the driver > opt-out of the link bandwidth notifications, as the driver knows that > there is some autonomous entity on the endpoint mucking with the link > parameters. > Adding Alex and Ben for AMD and NVIDIA info Dave.