[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] Address error and recovery for AER and DPC
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 01:02:15PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 12:54:15PM +0530, Oza Pawandeep wrote:
> > This patch set brings in support for DPC and AER to co-exist and not to
> > race for recovery.
> >
> > The current implementation of AER and error message broadcasting to the
> > EP driver is tightly coupled and limited to AER service driver.
> > It is important to factor out broadcasting and other link handling
> > callbacks. So that not only when AER gets triggered, but also when DPC get
> > triggered, or both get triggered simultaneously (for e.g. ERR_FATAL),
> > callbacks are handled appropriately.
> > having modularized the code, the race between AER and DPC is handled
> > gracefully.
> > for e.g. when DPC is active and kicked in, AER should not attempt to do
> > recovery, because DPC takes care of it.
> High-level question:
> We have some convoluted code in negotiate_os_control() and
> aer_service_init() that (I think) essentially disables AER unless the
> platform firmware grants us permission to use it.
> The last implementation note in PCIe r3.1, sec 6.2.10 says
> DPC may be controlled in some configurations by platform firmware
> and in other configurations by the operating system. DPC
> functionality is strongly linked with the functionality in Advanced
> Error Reporting. To avoid conflicts over whether platform firmware
> or the operating system have control of DPC, it is recommended that
> platform firmware and operating systems always link the control of
> DPC to the control of Advanced Error Reporting.
> I read that as suggesting that we should enable DPC support in Linux
> if and only if we also enable AER. But I don't see anything in DPC
> that looks like that. Should there be something there? Should DPC be
> restructured so it's enabled and handled inside the AER driver instead
> of being a separate driver?

Yes, I agree the two should be linked. I submitted a patch for that here,
though driver responsibilities are still separate in this series:

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-02 20:09    [W:0.092 / U:1.760 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site