Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:48:29 +0100
From:   Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc:     "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>,
        "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>,
        "Li, Ming4" <ming4.li@intel.com>,
        "Verma, Vishal L" <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        "Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
        "linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org" <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/DOE: Remove asynchronous task support
Message-ID: <20221122194829.GB20515@wunner.de>
References: <20221119222527.1799836-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <IA1PR11MB6171B27750AB469AFE47CD5E890A9@IA1PR11MB6171.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <20221121110714.0000720a@Huawei.com>
 <IA1PR11MB6171444A263C4ABB216FF1F5890A9@IA1PR11MB6171.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <20221121174148.0000647d@Huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221121174148.0000647d@Huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 05:41:48PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 14:17:37 +0000 "Zhuo, Qiuxu" <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com> wrote:
> > It's good that this potential issue has been noticed. I think moving
> > the 'find' logic and the xarray from CXL to the PCI core should save
> > a lot of such duplicated works for other drivers using DOE.
> > 
> > One more though:
> > For a driver, I think it's only interested in getting a DOE mailbox
> > from a PCI device with specified VID+protocol and using it.
> > The driver doesn't care how is the DOE mailbox instance created and
> > the driver also doesn't want to maintain it.

Totally agree on all of your above points Qiuxu.


> > After using the DOE mailbox instance then the driver puts it back.

That won't be necessary I think.  The PCI core allocates all existing
DOE mailboxes and enumerates the supported protocols.  Drivers just
ask the PCI core for a mailbox supporting a specific protocol and
are free to use that as long as the PCI device exists.


> There is also a dance around interrupts (once those are supported
> for DOEs in general).  Until the PCI driver has requested interrupts
> we can't use them for DOE, but we may want to poll it before that
> stage then switch over.

Thomas Gleixner has returned to his patch sets for dynamic MSI-X
allocation.  We'll be able to leverage that to request an interrupt
in the PCI core for DOE before a driver is bound.  And a driver
can then get additional MSI-X vectors if needed.  Will only work
for MSI-X though, not MSI.

Thanks,

Lukas