From: Dan Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Cc: email@example.com, Linux PCI <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Ben Widawsky <email@example.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Chris Browy <email@example.com>,
Linux ACPI <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Schofield, Alison" <email@example.com>,
Vishal L Verma <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"Weiny, Ira" <email@example.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Linuxarm <email@example.com>, Fangjian <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] cxl/mem: Add CDAT table reading from DOE
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 18:42:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4ikiWau7J-uc7yj85VCfPrc2ivnJ81fSnkEN0SXciDUyg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 3:38 AM Jonathan Cameron
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 15:00:08 -0700
> Dan Williams <email@example.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 10:15 AM Jonathan Cameron
> > <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 02:03:06 +0800
> > > Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This patch simply provides some debug print outs of the entries
> > > > at probe time + a sysfs binary attribute to allow dumping of the
> > > > whole table.
> > > >
> > > > Binary dumping is modelled on /sys/firmware/ACPI/tables/
> > > >
> > > > The ability to dump this table will be very useful for emulation of
> > > > real devices once they become available as QEMU CXL type 3 device
> > > > emulation will be able to load this file in.
> > > >
> > > > Open questions:
> > > > * No support here for table updates. Worth including these from the
> > > > start, or leave that complexity for later?
> > > > * Worth logging the reported info for debug, or is the binary attribute
> > > > sufficient? Larger open question of whether to expose this info to
> > > > userspace or not left for another day!
> > > > * Where to put the CDAT file? Is it worth a subdirectory?
> > > > * What is maximum size of the SSLBIS entry - I haven't quite managed
> > > > to figure that out and this is the record with largest size.
> > > > We could support dynamic allocation of the record size, but it
> > > > would add complexity that seems unnecessary.
> > > > It would not be compliant with the specification for a type 3 memory
> > > > device to report this record anyway so I'm not that worried about this
> > > > for now. It will become relevant once we have support for reading
> > > > CDAT from CXL switches.
> > > > * cdat.h is formatted in a similar style to pci_regs.h on basis that
> > > > it may well be helpful to share this header with userspace tools.
> > > > * Move the generic parts of this out to driver/cxl/cdat.c or leave that
> > > > until we have other CXL drivers wishing to use this?
> > >
> > > Naturally I remembered another open question within 10 seconds of sending :(
> > >
> > > * Do we want to add any sort of header to the RAW dump of CDAT to aid
> > > tooling? Whilst it looks a little like an ACPI table it doesn't have
> > > a signature.
> > >
> > > My gut feeling is no, because the CDAT specification doesn't define one but
> > > I can see that it might be very convenient to have something that identified
> > > the data once it was put in a file.
> > I'm not yet convinced raw dumping is worth it for the same reason that
> > command payload logging was eliminated from the v5.12-rc1 submission.
> > There's not much userspace can do with the information besides debug
> > the kernel behavior. If the kernel assigns a numa node to target a
> > given CXL memory range with NUMA apis then HMEM_REPORTING should
> > enumerate the properties. In other words, don't expand the userspace
> > ABI problem, funnel users to the canonical source for such data.
> As someone who finds raw dumping of ACPI tables extremely helpful in every
> day use for debugging of some of our 'interesting' hardware, I know I'm going
> to end up carrying that element locally anyway. I don't have a particular
> problem doing so if we decide to not to upstream it.
> Much like the ACPI table dumping, it's not an interface you expect userspace
> to ever use and I fully agree that we should expose things properly as you
> Short term my interest here is to get the DOE code upstream as step 1 of
> moving to a full solution. The printing and dumping is really just PoC element
> to prove out the interface. Any issue with putting the prints under _dbg()?
debugfs_create_blob()? Although debugfs makes it annoying to support
per device blobs. I could get on board with a root-only sysfs
attribute, but using a static DEVICE_ATTR_ADMIN_RO()... more comments
incoming in a review of the patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-17 1:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-10 18:03 [RFC PATCH 0/2] PCI Data Object Exchange support + CXL CDAT Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-10 18:03 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] PCI/doe: Initial support PCI Data Object Exchange Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-15 19:45 ` Dan Williams
2021-03-16 16:29 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-16 16:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-16 18:14 ` Dan Williams
2021-03-16 23:26 ` Chris Browy
2021-03-18 1:30 ` Dan Williams
2021-03-18 14:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-06-17 17:12 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-06-17 19:48 ` Chris Browy
2021-03-23 18:22 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-23 18:57 ` Dan Williams
2021-03-10 18:03 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] cxl/mem: Add CDAT table reading from DOE Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-10 18:14 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-10 22:59 ` Chris Browy
2021-03-15 22:00 ` Dan Williams
2021-03-16 10:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-03-17 1:42 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2021-03-17 1:55 ` Dan Williams
[not found] <CAAJ9+9fq1=EcOaSoo3oD_5QjYNAv6PPDjKS+gC9o7XDp2p1XpQ@mail.gmail.com>
2022-01-12 22:16 ` Zayd Qumsieh
2022-01-13 9:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-01-15 0:15 ` Zayd Qumsieh
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).