lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] PCI/ACPI: Disable AER when _OSC control bit is clear.
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 10:20:06AM -0600, Yazen Ghannam wrote:
> From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
>
> Currently, aer_service_init() checks if AER is available and that
> Firmware First handling is not enabled. The _OSC request for AER is not
> taken into account when deciding to enable AER in Linux.

It *looks* like it should be, via the following paths:

acpi_pci_root_add
negotiate_os_control
if (pci_aer_available() ...)
control |= OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_AER_CONTROL
acpi_pci_osc_control_set(..., &control, ...)
acpi_pci_run_osc
root->osc_control_set = *mask

pcie_portdrv_probe
pcie_port_device_register
get_port_device_capability
pcie_port_platform_notify
pcie_port_acpi_setup
flags = root->osc_control_set
if (flags & OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_AER_CONTROL)
*srv_mask |= PCIE_PORT_SERVICE_AER

But the _OSC and PCIe port driver setup is way too complicated, so I'm
not surprised something is broken.

Where did this path go wrong? Could a similar problem happen with
services other than AER? Is this fixing a real defect you tripped
over? If so, what are the details of the problem?

The idea of "the OS not setting a control bit, but the platform
returning with it set" is not specific to AER, so if we need to check
for that, I think we should be consistent and do it for *all* the
bits, not just AER.

> From ACPI 6.2 Section 6.2.11.3, "If any bits in the Control Field are
> returned cleared (masked to zero) by the _OSC control method, the
> respective feature is designated unsupported by the platform and must
> not be enabled by the OS."
>
> The OS and the Platform should agree that the OS can have control of AER
> otherwise we should disable AER in the OS.
>
> Mark AER as disabled if the _OSC request was not made or accepted.
>
> This covers two cases where the OS and Platform disagree:
> 1) The OS requests AER control and Platform denies the request.
> 2) The OS does not request AER control but the Platform returns the AER
> control bit set, possibly due to a Firmware bug.
>
> The _OSC control for AER is not requested when APEI Firmware First is
> used, so the same condition applies from case 2 above.
>
> Remove redundant check for aer_acpi_firmware_first() when calling
> aer_service_init(), since this check is already included when checking
> the _OSC control.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> ---
> Link:
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180111150316.19951-1-Yazen.Ghannam@amd.com
>
> v1->v2:
> * Expand commit message.
> * Add Spec reference to commit message.
> * Fix spelling error in commit message.
> * Add comment for 3-way bitwise AND.
>
> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 7 +++++++
> drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> index 6fc204a52493..ab0192fd24c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> @@ -512,6 +512,13 @@ static void negotiate_os_control(struct acpi_pci_root *root, int *no_aspm)
> */
> *no_aspm = 1;
> }
> +
> + /*
> + * We can use a 3-way bitwise AND to check that the AER control bit is
> + * both requested by the OS and granted by the Platform.
> + */
> + if (!(requested & control & OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_AER_CONTROL))
> + pci_no_aer();

Now I think root->osc_control_set is incorrect: it claims the OS
controls AER, but that is not the case.

We should handle all these services the same way. AFAICS,
osc_control_set is what the others rely on, so AER should do the same.

> }
>
> static int acpi_pci_root_add(struct acpi_device *device,
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c
> index 6ff5f5b4f5e6..39bb059777d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv.c
> @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ static void aer_error_resume(struct pci_dev *dev)
> */
> static int __init aer_service_init(void)
> {
> - if (!pci_aer_available() || aer_acpi_firmware_first())
> + if (!pci_aer_available())

I agree this looks redundant. I *think* it is unrelated to the rest
of the patch and should be split out to a separate patch because it
confuses what is already a confusing situation.

> return -ENXIO;
> return pcie_port_service_register(&aerdriver);
> }
> --
> 2.14.1
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-15 22:12    [W:0.037 / U:1.988 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site