Received: by 10.223.164.202 with SMTP id h10csp4705053wrb; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:27:48 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMbt5juh66KPYw9DOv7UTwoZFSB7aCGhrrlmKyR0feOrtNU8R5x0crs4oxgDiG3b25jBP+QM X-Received: by 10.98.71.144 with SMTP id p16mr3844305pfi.15.1511980068837; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:27:48 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1511980068; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=cN+YJrZ3L9bnzGc7w4M2UD60VMXVFKP66nkQaaQhQr67V+rMifpL0p1skvljXToT7w Del4DE0tlqdprtVTJToeKwMj6JNRomGJK2irImja/75H+a7ZchYLx6TgJv8lPNM0s3qL XGzT1t6rGlmPdfU1SPzNeF3arbjWQj+GJMdbAsrCQxmlBfqCRBUJzFwq0HoF/DIuOJuB B5ImCPMW8UUplGVQfbCWP/HRmFlS2SWLHoypJ99R1psoqL5hRBvjf6d9sTBcg52KYLYA /bxPbaWVF81vG3WWnci5fyq++SaWBksi4p/5Dv9+m0ayATzgpBREb4Nuoc3PpEUuV7FA PWHg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=kmGELjrrgX/31dk8nys80IuVL9wtxpHo5O7Jfl+KdJg=; b=q8ICY9Ev2oF8nQlJm7FLlTx+mVBaC7au5uolSgdRQIDZlQ8URvzBPK0amg1Z4xE4Vc tVS9I/RTYjKyHiJ35UWjA7pSHo7AZn5nYEt9Tvdlcqmrvlm8HjEiumCZYpaHTqqCo0Ns v8AKRChuJD17JFe6rvsP4dQTX1x8OEIynDp3WyE2FCDWG1rvIZbuGP7VPuJxO1jdcOeu QLM927DZjjpse9EgHZ831tTzjBX+/IkYsenNcCqI9PHPT5RypJ4bfEw21oHVp26Q9i/z 5r1IUAwzM/N5Emqldsv/tA03bExMH1yRaO1EZbJiweI6wzuogeTkLc0e3XMgjnLKuQqy VLhw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id q29si1590743pgc.795.2017.11.29.10.27.38; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:27:48 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753072AbdK2SPa (ORCPT + 69 others); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:15:30 -0500 Received: from emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi ([62.142.5.110]:47064 "EHLO emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752692AbdK2SP1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:15:27 -0500 Received: from ydin.reaktio.net (reaktio.net [85.76.255.15]) by emh04.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id D271B1A260D; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 20:05:29 +0200 (EET) Received: by ydin.reaktio.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id ABA6936C0F6; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 20:05:29 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 20:05:29 +0200 From: Pasi =?iso-8859-1?Q?K=E4rkk=E4inen?= To: Govinda Tatti Cc: Jan Beulich , Konrad Wilk , Juergen Gross , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Boris Ostrovsky , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Xen/pciback: Implement PCI slot or bus reset with 'do_flr' SysFS attribute Message-ID: <20171129180529.GQ20756@reaktio.net> References: <20171106174842.20276-1-Govinda.Tatti@Oracle.COM> <5A01D3F3020000780018CE86@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <8940b38d-715c-9fcb-cc74-46574d416703@oracle.com> <5A041FB9020000780018D6E8@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <5A1EE1D50200007800193318@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:25:09AM -0600, Govinda Tatti wrote: > > >>>Furthermore, contrary to what you claim in > >>>your reply to Pasi, I can't see where you try an actual FLR first - > >>>you go straight to pci_probe_reset_{slot,bus}(). If you actually > >>>tried FLR first, only falling back to the other methods as "emulation", > >>>I could certainly agree with the file name chosen. > >>Currently, multiple resets are being invoked (independently) in the context > >>of "xl attach/detach/shutdown/reboot". > >> > >>- pci_reset_function_locked (invoked by pcistub_put_pci_dev()) > >> This function tries various PCI reset methods including FLR. > >>- pcistub_reset_dev (called by toolsstack based on "do_flr" attribute) > >While related in a certain way, I can't really see how this addresses > >the comment. > > pcistub_reset_dev() just tries slot or bus reset but not FLR since it is > being > checked and executed by pci_reset_function_locked() if supported. May be we > can > add FLR reset code to pcistub_reset_dev() and try FLR first before fall-back > to > slot/bus reset. > Hmm.. is the suitable reset method something that can be figured out automatically? I mean if FLR is tried first, but it isn't supported by the device, is it OK to go ahead and do a slot/bus reset automatically? What if there are other devices in the same bus, wouldn't automatic bus reset be a bad thing? Or should the reset-method be configured by the user for the VM / PCI device ? Just thinking out loud here.. > Cheers > GOVINDA > Thanks, -- Pasi From 1585425765456499066@xxx Wed Nov 29 18:23:53 +0000 2017 X-GM-THRID: 1583346318922306893 X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread