From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: "aik@ozlabs.ru" <aik@ozlabs.ru>,
Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" <kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>,
"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] powerpc/eeh: Avoid event on passed PE
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 08:20:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0A9AFF1F-B755-4223-9F90-B08E92F10951@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1400631544.3986.151.camel@pasglop>
> Am 21.05.2014 um 02:19 schrieb Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashin=
g.org>:
>=20
>> On Tue, 2014-05-20 at 15:49 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> So how about we just implement this whole thing properly as irqfd?=20
>> Whether QEMU can actually do anything with the interrupt is a different=20=
>> question - we can leave it be for now. But we could model all the code=20=
>> with the assumption that it should either handle the error itself or=20
>> trigger and irqfd write.
>=20
> I don't object to the idea... however this smells of Deja Vu...
>=20
> You often tend to want to turn something submitted that fills a specific
> gap and implements a specific spec/function into some kind of idealized
> grand design :-) And that means nothing gets upstream for weeks or monthes=
> as we churn and churn...
>=20
> Sometimes it's probably worth it. Here I would argue against it and would
> advocate for doing the basic functionality first, as it is used by guests,=
> and later add the irqfd option. I don't see any emergency here and adding
> the irqfd will not cause fundamental design changes:
>=20
> The "passed" flag (though I'm not fan of the name) is really something
> we want in the low level handlers to avoid triggering host side EEH in
> various places, regardless of whether we use irqfd or not.
>=20
> This is totally orthogonal from the mechanism used for notifications.
>=20
> Even in host, the detection path doesn't always involve interrupts, and
> we can detect some things as a result of a host side config space access
> for example etc...
>=20
> So let's keep things nice and separate here. The interrupt notification
> is just an "optimization" which will speed up discovery of the error in
> *some* cases later on (but adds its own complexity since we have multiple
> discovery path in host, so we need to keep track whether we have notified
> yet or not etc...) so let's keep it for later.
EEH handling is your call, but I only see reduced complexity here. I won't n=
ak the current approach though.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-21 6:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-20 8:30 [PATCH RFCv4 0/4] EEH Support for VFIO PCI device Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 8:30 ` [PATCH 1/4] drivers/vfio: Introduce CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_EEH Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 8:30 ` [PATCH 2/4] powerpc/eeh: Flags for passed device and PE Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 8:30 ` [PATCH 3/4] drivers/vfio: New IOCTL command VFIO_EEH_INFO Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 11:21 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 11:28 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 11:40 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 11:44 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 12:21 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 12:25 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 12:39 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 0:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-21 4:39 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 6:23 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 7:24 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-21 10:48 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 0:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-20 8:30 ` [PATCH 4/4] powerpc/eeh: Avoid event on passed PE Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 11:25 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 11:56 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 12:14 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-20 12:45 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-20 13:49 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 0:13 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-21 6:16 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 0:19 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-21 6:20 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2014-05-21 0:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-21 4:41 ` Gavin Shan
2014-06-03 5:54 ` Paul Mackerras
2014-06-03 7:45 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-03 7:52 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=0A9AFF1F-B755-4223-9F90-B08E92F10951@suse.de \
--to=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.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
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).