linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
To: "Li, Ming" <ming4.li@intel.com>
Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>,
	<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] PCI/DOE: Remove the pci_doe_flush_mb() call
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:42:03 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4Ty688S9k7kV/d6@iweiny-desk3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f6e7bd7a-c901-a38c-e427-e9671dfb6d6c@intel.com>

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 01:51:24PM +0800, Li, Ming wrote:
> 
> On 11/28/2022 12:03 PM, ira.weiny@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> > 
> > pci_doe_flush_mb() does not work and is currently unused.
> > 
> > It does not work because each struct doe_mb is managed as part of the
> > PCI device.  They can't go away as long as the PCI device exists.
> > pci_doe_flush_mb() was set up to flush the workqueue and prevent any
> > further submissions to the mailboxes when the PCI device goes away.
> > Unfortunately, this was fundamentally flawed.  There was no guarantee
> > that a struct doe_mb remained after pci_doe_flush_mb() returned.
> > Therefore, the doe_mb state could be invalid when those threads waiting
> > on the workqueue were flushed.
> > 
> > Fortunately the current code is safe because all callers make a
> > synchronous call to pci_doe_submit_task() and maintain a reference on
> > the PCI device.  Therefore pci_doe_flush_mb() is effectively unused.
> > 
> > Rather than attempt to fix pci_doe_flush_mb() just remove the dead code
> > around pci_doe_flush_mb().
> > 
> > Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
> > Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
> 
> Some comments inline.
> 
> > 
> > ---
> > Changes from V2:
> > 	Lukas
> > 		Clarify commit message.
> > 	Jonathan
> > 		Add comment for changed poll interval.
> 
> ...
> 
> >  
> > -static int pci_doe_wait(struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb, unsigned long timeout)
> > -{
> > -	if (wait_event_timeout(doe_mb->wq,
> > -			       test_bit(PCI_DOE_FLAG_CANCEL, &doe_mb->flags),
> > -			       timeout))
> > -		return -EIO;
> > -	return 0;
> > -}
> > -
> >  static void pci_doe_write_ctrl(struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb, u32 val)
> >  {
> >  	struct pci_dev *pdev = doe_mb->pdev;
> > @@ -82,12 +73,9 @@ static int pci_doe_abort(struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb)
> >  	pci_doe_write_ctrl(doe_mb, PCI_DOE_CTRL_ABORT);
> >  
> >  	do {
> > -		int rc;
> >  		u32 val;
> >  
> > -		rc = pci_doe_wait(doe_mb, PCI_DOE_POLL_INTERVAL);
> > -		if (rc)
> > -			return rc;
> > +		msleep_interruptible(PCI_DOE_POLL_INTERVAL_MSECS);
> >  		pci_read_config_dword(pdev, offset + PCI_DOE_STATUS, &val);
> 
> Looks like we don't have to use msleep_interruptible() here, can use msleep() directly?

I don't know.  I think your suggestion below holds here too.  Unfortunately
that could mask the signal received in the case below.  But I think that is
going to be rare enough we could ignore it.

> 
> >  
> >  		/* Abort success! */
> > @@ -278,11 +266,7 @@ static void doe_statemachine_work(struct work_struct *work)
> >  			signal_task_abort(task, -EIO);
> >  			return;
> >  		}
> > -		rc = pci_doe_wait(doe_mb, PCI_DOE_POLL_INTERVAL);
> > -		if (rc) {
> > -			signal_task_abort(task, rc);
> > -			return;
> > -		}
> > +		msleep_interruptible(PCI_DOE_POLL_INTERVAL_MSECS);
> >  		goto retry_resp;
> >  	}
> 
> I guess that you use msleep_interruptible() here for aborting current task when signals come.
> So there should be signal_task_abort() and return when msleep_interruptible() receives a signal.

Yes this makes much more sense.  Thanks for looking!
Ira

> 
> Thanks
> Ming
> 
> >  
> > @@ -383,21 +367,6 @@ static void pci_doe_destroy_workqueue(void *mb)
> >  	destroy_workqueue(doe_mb->work_queue);
> >  }
> >  
> > -static void pci_doe_flush_mb(void *mb)
> > -{
> > -	struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb = mb;
> > -
> > -	/* Stop all pending work items from starting */
> > -	set_bit(PCI_DOE_FLAG_DEAD, &doe_mb->flags);
> > -
> > -	/* Cancel an in progress work item, if necessary */
> > -	set_bit(PCI_DOE_FLAG_CANCEL, &doe_mb->flags);
> > -	wake_up(&doe_mb->wq);
> > -
> > -	/* Flush all work items */
> > -	flush_workqueue(doe_mb->work_queue);
> > -}
> > -
> >  /**
> >   * pcim_doe_create_mb() - Create a DOE mailbox object
> >   *
> > @@ -450,14 +419,6 @@ struct pci_doe_mb *pcim_doe_create_mb(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 cap_offset)
> >  		return ERR_PTR(rc);
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	/*
> > -	 * The state machine and the mailbox should be in sync now;
> > -	 * Set up mailbox flush prior to using the mailbox to query protocols.
> > -	 */
> > -	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, pci_doe_flush_mb, doe_mb);
> > -	if (rc)
> > -		return ERR_PTR(rc);
> > -
> >  	rc = pci_doe_cache_protocols(doe_mb);
> >  	if (rc) {
> >  		pci_err(pdev, "[%x] failed to cache protocols : %d\n",
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-28 17:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-28  4:03 [PATCH V3 0/2] PCI/DOE: Remove asynchronous task support ira.weiny
2022-11-28  4:03 ` [PATCH V3 1/2] PCI/DOE: Remove the pci_doe_flush_mb() call ira.weiny
2022-11-28  5:51   ` Li, Ming
2022-11-28 17:42     ` Ira Weiny [this message]
2022-11-28 17:51   ` Alison Schofield
2022-11-28 19:41     ` Ira Weiny
2022-11-28  4:03 ` [PATCH V3 2/2] PCI/DOE: Remove asynchronous task support ira.weiny
2022-11-28 17:58   ` Alison Schofield
2022-11-28 19:47     ` Ira Weiny
     [not found] ` <20221128095112.6047-1-hdanton@sina.com>
2022-11-28 16:57   ` Ira Weiny

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=Y4Ty688S9k7kV/d6@iweiny-desk3 \
    --to=ira.weiny@intel.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=gregory.price@memverge.com \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=ming4.li@intel.com \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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).