Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753315Ab3JBHIJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2013 03:08:09 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10221 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752746Ab3JBHIH (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Oct 2013 03:08:07 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 09:10:00 +0200 From: Alexander Gordeev To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Tejun Heo , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-ide@vger.kernel.org" , Ingo Molnar , Joerg Roedel , Jan Beulich , Bjorn Helgaas , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] PCI/MSI: Factor out pci_get_msi_cap() interface Message-ID: <20131002071000.GA29860@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> References: <20130906160621.GF22763@mtj.dyndns.org> <20130906233205.GF12956@google.com> <20130909152044.GA24962@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20130916102210.GA14102@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20130917143022.GA7707@concordia> <20130918094759.GA2353@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20131001075133.GJ17966@concordia> <20131001103526.GA5053@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <20131002024324.GC22748@concordia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131002024324.GC22748@concordia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2427 Lines: 55 On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:43:24PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 12:35:27PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 05:51:33PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > The disadvantage is that any restriction imposed on us above the quota > > > can only be reported as an error from pci_enable_msix(). > > > > > > The quota code, called from pci_get_msix_limit(), can only do so much to > > > interogate firmware about the limitations. The ultimate way to check if > > > firmware will give us enough MSIs is to try and allocate them. But we > > > can't do that from pci_get_msix_limit() because the driver is not asking > > > us to enable MSIs, just query them. > > > > If things are this way then pci_enable_msix() already exposed to this > > problem internally on pSeries. > > > > I see that even successful quota checks in rtas_msi_check_device() and > > rtas_setup_msi_irqs() do not guarantee (as you say) that firmware will > > give enough MSIs. Hence, pci_enable_msix() might fail even though the > > its quota checks succeeded. > > Yes, but it can report that failure to the caller, which can then retry. If a driver wants to retry after a failure it is up to the driver (but why?). The current guidlines state: "If this function returns a negative number, it indicates an error and the driver should not attempt to allocate any more MSI-X interrupts for this device." Anyway, what number could the driver retry with after it got a negative errno? > > Therefore, nothing will really change if we make pci_get_msix_limit() check > > quota and hope the follow-up call to pci_enable_msix() succeeded. > > No that's not equivalent. Under your scheme if pci_enable_msix() fails > then the caller just bails, it will never try again with a lower number. Currently under the very same circumstances (the quota check within rtas_setup_msi_irqs() returned Q vectors while the firmware has only F vectors to allocate and Q > F) rtas_setup_msi_irqs() fails, pci_enable_msix() fails, the caller bails and never try again with a lower number. Am I missing something here? > cheers -- Regards, Alexander Gordeev agordeev@redhat.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/