Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] PCI/ERR: Fix reset logic in pcie_do_recovery()
 call
To:     "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc:     bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ashok.raj@intel.com,
        Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@canonical.com>
References: <20200922233333.GA2239404@bjorn-Precision-5520>
 <704c39bf-6f0c-bba3-70b8-91de6a445e43@linux.intel.com>
 <3d27d0a4-2115-fa72-8990-a84910e4215f@kernel.org>
 <d5aa53dc-0c94-e57a-689a-1c1f89787af1@linux.intel.com>
 <526dc846-b12b-3523-4995-966eb972ceb7@kernel.org>
 <1fdcc4a6-53b7-2b5f-8496-f0f09405f561@linux.intel.com>
 <aef0b9aa-59f5-9ec3-adac-5bc366b362e0@kernel.org>
 <a647f485-8db4-db45-f404-940b55117b53@linux.intel.com>
 <aefd8842-90c4-836a-b43a-f21c5428d2ba@kernel.org>
 <95e23cb5-f6e1-b121-0de8-a2066d507d9c@linux.intel.com>
 <65238d0b-0a39-400a-3a18-4f68eb554538@kernel.org>
 <4ae86061-2182-bcf1-ebd7-485acf2d47b9@linux.intel.com>
From:   Sinan Kaya <okaya@kernel.org>
Autocrypt: addr=okaya@kernel.org; keydata=
 mQENBFrnOrUBCADGOL0kF21B6ogpOkuYvz6bUjO7NU99PKhXx1MfK/AzK+SFgxJF7dMluoF6
 uT47bU7zb7HqACH6itTgSSiJeSoq86jYoq5s4JOyaj0/18Hf3/YBah7AOuwk6LtV3EftQIhw
 9vXqCnBwP/nID6PQ685zl3vH68yzF6FVNwbDagxUz/gMiQh7scHvVCjiqkJ+qu/36JgtTYYw
 8lGWRcto6gr0eTF8Wd8f81wspmUHGsFdN/xPsZPKMw6/on9oOj3AidcR3P9EdLY4qQyjvcNC
 V9cL9b5I/Ud9ghPwW4QkM7uhYqQDyh3SwgEFudc+/RsDuxjVlg9CFnGhS0nPXR89SaQZABEB
 AAG0HVNpbmFuIEtheWEgPG9rYXlhQGtlcm5lbC5vcmc+iQFOBBMBCAA4FiEEYdOlMSE+a7/c
 ckrQvGF4I+4LAFcFAlztcAoCGwMFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQvGF4I+4L
 AFfidAf/VKHInxep0Z96iYkIq42432HTZUrxNzG9IWk4HN7c3vTJKv2W+b9pgvBF1SmkyQSy
 8SJ3Zd98CO6FOHA1FigFyZahVsme+T0GsS3/OF1kjrtMktoREr8t0rK0yKpCTYVdlkHadxmR
 Qs5xLzW1RqKlrNigKHI2yhgpMwrpzS+67F1biT41227sqFzW9urEl/jqGJXaB6GV+SRKSHN+
 ubWXgE1NkmfAMeyJPKojNT7ReL6eh3BNB/Xh1vQJew+AE50EP7o36UXghoUktnx6cTkge0ZS
 qgxuhN33cCOU36pWQhPqVSlLTZQJVxuCmlaHbYWvye7bBOhmiuNKhOzb3FcgT7kBDQRa5zq1
 AQgAyRq/7JZKOyB8wRx6fHE0nb31P75kCnL3oE+smKW/sOcIQDV3C7mZKLf472MWB1xdr4Tm
 eXeL/wT0QHapLn5M5wWghC80YvjjdolHnlq9QlYVtvl1ocAC28y43tKJfklhHiwMNDJfdZbw
 9lQ2h+7nccFWASNUu9cqZOABLvJcgLnfdDpnSzOye09VVlKr3NHgRyRZa7me/oFJCxrJlKAl
 2hllRLt0yV08o7i14+qmvxI2EKLX9zJfJ2rGWLTVe3EJBnCsQPDzAUVYSnTtqELu2AGzvDiM
 gatRaosnzhvvEK+kCuXuCuZlRWP7pWSHqFFuYq596RRG5hNGLbmVFZrCxQARAQABiQEfBBgB
 CAAJBQJa5zq1AhsMAAoJELxheCPuCwBX2UYH/2kkMC4mImvoClrmcMsNGijcZHdDlz8NFfCI
 gSb3NHkarnA7uAg8KJuaHUwBMk3kBhv2BGPLcmAknzBIehbZ284W7u3DT9o1Y5g+LDyx8RIi
 e7pnMcC+bE2IJExCVf2p3PB1tDBBdLEYJoyFz/XpdDjZ8aVls/pIyrq+mqo5LuuhWfZzPPec
 9EiM2eXpJw+Rz+vKjSt1YIhg46YbdZrDM2FGrt9ve3YaM5H0lzJgq/JQPKFdbd5MB0X37Qc+
 2m/A9u9SFnOovA42DgXUyC2cSbIJdPWOK9PnzfXqF3sX9Aol2eLUmQuLpThJtq5EHu6FzJ7Y
 L+s0nPaNMKwv/Xhhm6Y=
Message-ID: <f360165e-5f73-057c-efd1-557b5e5027eb@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 13:47:41 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4ae86061-2182-bcf1-ebd7-485acf2d47b9@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 9/25/2020 1:11 PM, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>> Why? Isn't DPC slot reset enough?
> It will do the reset at hardware level. But driver state is not
> cleaned up. So doing bus reset will restore both driver and
> hardware states.

I really don't like this. If hotplug driver is restoring the state
and DPC driver is not; let's fix the DPC driver rather than causing
two resets and hope for the best.

One approach is to share the restore code between hotplug driver and
DPC driver.

If this is a too involved change, DPC driver should restore state
when hotplug is not supported.

DPC driver should be self-sufficient by itself.

> Also for non-fatal errors, if reset is requested then we still need
> some kind of bus reset call here.

DPC should handle both fatal and non-fatal cases and cause a bus reset
in hardware already before triggering an interrupt.

I disagree that you need an additional reset on top of DPC reset.
Isn't one reset enough?

What will the second reset provide that first reset won't provide?

I see that you are trying to do the second reset only because second
reset restores state.

That looks like a short-term fix only to explode on the next iteration.