Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:6744:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w4csp3435237pxu; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 12:01:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyxorNoQxCOdxfyxgWBI/FsNzCkXKUgHuYI3ZXSDrVSjsfdt+1OLBgxr7U5/igV7MATHyrL X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:d8b6:: with SMTP id qc22mr1396512ejb.196.1603134070213; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 12:01:10 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1603134070; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=DW3kLEwwC8AC08mrlK4FoObvr5GWhh+17qlWGz3owkVlXObakM5DSd040sU3g2gvGh DznZphVGzDUBU5p/C5cwFN2fIWPVKHfSmcEVJi8mEkfk2vujWeT0kXUj1yNQyidFXHg0 uIXEX4/h4oWzcxStcX54u419jcRSGwiAhGpP6xN9yHM2XtUNghGh+jQbaUfUvQ2lj+Qa srTjAcGSa2tYqzfq+Kne24hSAXAHewt1hZAvmbOJLEfkMEAItj+W20Dcj2Z26CXGtBx/ ey30cQaUxYcRD/Umbh6hEJNNhy0Ilv2WfFBo3KtuS59Baq0qx0SkRAbwpyHVn2K3AWOB XV4g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-language:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject:ironport-sdr:ironport-sdr; bh=mh3EuRObfCYr+O4hCtDEzrO2rCxgfF1bxnPube1aSSY=; b=u2q3K0WdUWpLPfgxHJbtJl4wn9QQ1eeFusk7OaMA4Dn124AVWWrCxqqudootaAAohX fbnSPqx5oX5RNr+/uZJ8Sop9KQUoWJw5313GJ1YoGlDFRs6qYfsL5kYpDu5VYpADFiwb 0mOrdXyokgb/cNUsWM00Sz0yEOPRL86RoJFzQz4jXHM3+aj4b7VBr5VpcxCccpKMtMda lZHXkDZBqzxWAd/f2uCPJZzYDiry6p85FivZTmpBA7OgmWBwwVINRA8wjSh+VBC/UxB7 1PGFLRQbP8Z5JvPrue5XKPrwubVy02WJ+M4/B3iZUPsGDr6mNUnXRbQIAOISkZenpyLi p/jw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a24si418495edt.297.2020.10.19.12.00.47; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 12:01:10 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730993AbgJSS7h (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:59:37 -0400 Received: from mga12.intel.com ([192.55.52.136]:57008 "EHLO mga12.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727681AbgJSS7h (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:59:37 -0400 IronPort-SDR: hs9qqbCnQ9LrJ5IvdNe0zGJJY2ySglCc2sFJ7mH6KOxSFbsarItj3mt8eAyr1401jnz+R/geuc j+cEu/Y7jowQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9779"; a="146381632" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,395,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="146381632" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Oct 2020 11:59:33 -0700 IronPort-SDR: UJLXsGDAvmQzdfNbmMbfgu0yh9vANTLnOCZHl2eF9aeXZvv0eug8SkkhJ72zPPLyoazcXudnAZ JLWRirOR5yMQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,395,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="315761189" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.254.70.85]) ([10.254.70.85]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 19 Oct 2020 11:59:31 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 12/15] PCI/RCEC: Add RCiEP's linked RCEC to AER/ERR To: Sean V Kelley , Ethan Zhao Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Sean V Kelley , Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, Bjorn Helgaas , rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, Ashok Raj , tony.luck@intel.com, qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com, linux-pci , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Christoph Hellwig , Sinan Kaya , Keith Busch References: <20201016203037.GA90074@bjorn-Precision-5520> <20201016222902.GA112659@bjorn-Precision-5520> <4F54EEC0-3933-4A2E-87BC-23FABECB0C0A@intel.com> From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" Message-ID: <240932c3-2cf4-5fbd-9cda-520bbd953fa6@linux.intel.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 11:59:29 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4F54EEC0-3933-4A2E-87BC-23FABECB0C0A@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/19/20 11:31 AM, Sean V Kelley wrote: > On 19 Oct 2020, at 3:49, Ethan Zhao wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 6:29 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> >>> [+cc Christoph, Ethan, Sinan, Keith; sorry should have cc'd you to >>> begin with since you're looking at this code too. Particularly >>> interested in your thoughts about whether we should be touching >>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS when we don't own AER.] >> >> aer_root_reset() function has a prefix  'aer_', looks like it's a >> function of aer driver, will >> only be called by aer driver at runtime. if so it's up to the >> owner/aer to know if OSPM is >> granted to init. while actually some of the functions and runtime service of >> aer driver is also shared by GHES driver (running time) and DPC driver >> (compiling time ?) >> etc. then it is confused now. >> >> Shall we move some of the shared functions and running time service to >> pci/err.c ? >> if so , just like pcie_do_recovery(), it's share by firmware_first  mode GHES >> ghes_probe() >> ->ghes_irq_func >>   ->ghes_proc >>     ->ghes_do_proc() >>       ->ghes_handle_aer() >>         ->aer_recover_work_func() >>           ->pcie_do_recovery() >>             ->aer_root_reset() >> >> and aer driver etc.  if aer wants to do some access might conflict >> with firmware(or >> firmware in embedded controller) should check _OSC_ etc first. blindly issue >> PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND  or clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS *likely* >> cause errors by error handling itself. > > If _OSC negotiation ends up with FW being in control of AER, that means OS is not in charge and > should not be messing with AER I guess. That seems appropriate to me then. But APEI based notification is more like a hybrid approach (frimware first detects the error and notifies OS). Since spec does not clarify what OS is allowed to do, its bit of a gray area now. My point is, since firmware allows OS to process the error by sending the notification, I think its OK to clear the status once the error is handled. > > Thanks, > > Sean > > > >> >> Thanks, >> Ethan >> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 03:30:37PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>> [+to Jonathan] >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:11:10PM -0700, Sean V Kelley wrote: >>>>> From: Qiuxu Zhuo >>>>> >>>>> When attempting error recovery for an RCiEP associated with an RCEC device, >>>>> there needs to be a way to update the Root Error Status, the Uncorrectable >>>>> Error Status and the Uncorrectable Error Severity of the parent RCEC.  In >>>>> some non-native cases in which there is no OS-visible device associated >>>>> with the RCiEP, there is nothing to act upon as the firmware is acting >>>>> before the OS. >>>>> >>>>> Add handling for the linked RCEC in AER/ERR while taking into account >>>>> non-native cases. >>>>> >>>>> Co-developed-by: Sean V Kelley >>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201002184735.1229220-12-seanvk.dev@oregontracks.org >>>>> Signed-off-by: Sean V Kelley >>>>> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo >>>>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas >>>>> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron >>>>> --- >>>>>  drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ >>>>>  drivers/pci/pcie/err.c | 20 ++++++++-------- >>>>>  2 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c >>>>> index 65dff5f3457a..083f69b67bfd 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer.c >>>>> @@ -1357,27 +1357,50 @@ static int aer_probe(struct pcie_device *dev) >>>>>   */ >>>>>  static pci_ers_result_t aer_root_reset(struct pci_dev *dev) >>>>>  { >>>>> -   int aer = dev->aer_cap; >>>>> +   int type = pci_pcie_type(dev); >>>>> +   struct pci_dev *root; >>>>> +   int aer = 0; >>>>> +   int rc = 0; >>>>>     u32 reg32; >>>>> -   int rc; >>>>> >>>>> +   if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END) >>>> >>>> "type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END" >>>> >>>>> +           /* >>>>> +            * The reset should only clear the Root Error Status >>>>> +            * of the RCEC. Only perform this for the >>>>> +            * native case, i.e., an RCEC is present. >>>>> +            */ >>>>> +           root = dev->rcec; >>>>> +   else >>>>> +           root = dev; >>>>> >>>>> -   /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */ >>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32); >>>>> -   reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK; >>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32); >>>>> +   if (root) >>>>> +           aer = dev->aer_cap; >>>>> >>>>> -   rc = pci_bus_error_reset(dev); >>>>> -   pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset\n"); >>>>> +   if (aer) { >>>>> +           /* Disable Root's interrupt in response to error messages */ >>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32); >>>>> +           reg32 &= ~ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK; >>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32); >>>> >>>> Not directly related to *this* patch, but my assumption was that in >>>> the APEI case, the firmware should retain ownership of the AER >>>> Capability, so the OS should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and >>>> PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS. >>>> >>>> But this code appears to ignore that ownership.  Jonathan, you must >>>> have looked at this recently for 068c29a248b6 ("PCI/ERR: Clear PCIe >>>> Device Status errors only if OS owns AER").  Do you have any insight >>>> about this? >>>> >>>>> -   /* Clear Root Error Status */ >>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, ®32); >>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32); >>>>> +           /* Clear Root Error Status */ >>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, ®32); >>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, reg32); >>>>> >>>>> -   /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */ >>>>> -   pci_read_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32); >>>>> -   reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK; >>>>> -   pci_write_config_dword(dev, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32); >>>>> +           /* Enable Root Port's interrupt in response to error messages */ >>>>> +           pci_read_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, ®32); >>>>> +           reg32 |= ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK; >>>>> +           pci_write_config_dword(root, aer + PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND, reg32); >>>>> +   } >>>>> + >>>>> +   if ((type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_EC) || (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END)) { >>>>> +           if (pcie_has_flr(root)) { >>>>> +                   rc = pcie_flr(root); >>>>> +                   pci_info(dev, "has been reset (%d)\n", rc); >>>>> +           } >>>>> +   } else { >>>>> +           rc = pci_bus_error_reset(root); >>>> >>>> Don't we want "dev" for both the FLR and pci_bus_error_reset()?  I >>>> think "root == dev" except when dev is an RCiEP.  When dev is an >>>> RCiEP, "root" is the RCEC (if present), and we want to reset the >>>> RCiEP, not the RCEC. >>>> >>>>> +           pci_info(dev, "Root Port link has been reset (%d)\n", rc); >>>>> +   } >>>> >>>> There are a couple changes here that I think should be split out. >>>> >>>> Based on my theory that when firmware retains control of AER, the OS >>>> should not touch PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS, and any >>>> updates to them would have to be done by firmware before we get here, >>>> I suggested reordering this: >>>> >>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK >>>>   - do reset >>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS (for APEI, presumably done by firmware?) >>>>   - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK >>>> >>>> to this: >>>> >>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK >>>>   - clear PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS >>>>   - enable PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND ROOT_PORT_INTR_ON_MESG_MASK >>>>   - do reset >>>> >>>> If my theory is correct, I think we should still reorder this, but: >>>> >>>>   - It's a significant behavior change that deserves its own patch so >>>>     we can document/bisect/revert. >>>> >>>>   - I'm not sure why we clear the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND error reporting >>>>     bits.  In the new "clear COMMAND, clear STATUS, enable COMMAND" >>>>     order, it looks superfluous.  There's no reason to disable error >>>>     reporting while clearing the status bits. >>>> >>>>     The current "clear, reset, enable" order suggests that the reset >>>>     might cause errors that we should ignore.  I don't know whether >>>>     that's the case or not.  It dates from 6c2b374d7485 ("PCI-Express >>>>     AER implemetation: AER core and aerdriver"), which doesn't >>>>     elaborate. >>>> >>>>   - Should we also test for OS ownership of AER before touching >>>>     PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS? >>>> >>>>   - If we remove the PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND fiddling (and I tentatively >>>>     think we *should* unless we can justify it), that would also >>>>     deserve its own patch.  Possibly (1) remove PCI_ERR_ROOT_COMMAND >>>>     fiddling, (2) reorder PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS clearing and reset, (3) >>>>     test for OS ownership of AER (?), (4) the rest of this patch. >>>> >>>>>     return rc ? PCI_ERS_RESULT_DISCONNECT : PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED; >>>>>  } >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c >>>>> index 7883c9791562..cbc5abfe767b 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/err.c >>>>> @@ -148,10 +148,10 @@ static int report_resume(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data) >>>>> >>>>>  /** >>>>>   * pci_walk_bridge - walk bridges potentially AER affected >>>>> - * @bridge:        bridge which may be a Port, an RCEC with associated RCiEPs, >>>>> - *         or an RCiEP associated with an RCEC >>>>> - * @cb:            callback to be called for each device found >>>>> - * @userdata:      arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback >>>>> + * @bridge   bridge which may be an RCEC with associated RCiEPs, >>>>> + *           or a Port. >>>>> + * @cb       callback to be called for each device found >>>>> + * @userdata arbitrary pointer to be passed to callback. >>>>>   * >>>>>   * If the device provided is a bridge, walk the subordinate bus, including >>>>>   * any bridged devices on buses under this bus.  Call the provided callback >>>>> @@ -164,8 +164,14 @@ static void pci_walk_bridge(struct pci_dev *bridge, >>>>>                         int (*cb)(struct pci_dev *, void *), >>>>>                         void *userdata) >>>>>  { >>>>> +   /* >>>>> +    * In a non-native case where there is no OS-visible reporting >>>>> +    * device the bridge will be NULL, i.e., no RCEC, no Downstream Port. >>>>> +    */ >>>>>     if (bridge->subordinate) >>>>>             pci_walk_bus(bridge->subordinate, cb, userdata); >>>>> +   else if (bridge->rcec) >>>>> +           cb(bridge->rcec, userdata); >>>>>     else >>>>>             cb(bridge, userdata); >>>>>  } >>>>> @@ -194,12 +200,6 @@ pci_ers_result_t pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, >>>>>     pci_dbg(bridge, "broadcast error_detected message\n"); >>>>>     if (state == pci_channel_io_frozen) { >>>>>             pci_walk_bridge(bridge, report_frozen_detected, &status); >>>>> -           if (type == PCI_EXP_TYPE_RC_END) { >>>>> -                   pci_warn(dev, "subordinate device reset not possible for RCiEP\n"); >>>>> -                   status = PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE; >>>>> -                   goto failed; >>>>> -           } >>>>> - >>>>>             status = reset_subordinates(bridge); >>>>>             if (status != PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED) { >>>>>                     pci_warn(bridge, "subordinate device reset failed\n"); >>>>> -- >>>>> 2.28.0 >>>>> -- Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Linux Kernel Developer