From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Fix allocation of interrupts
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:05:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200901152005.25370.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200901151742.09227.rjw@sisk.pl>
On Thursday 15 January 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday 15 January 2009, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
> > Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> > > Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >> On Wednesday 14 January 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >>> On Wednesday 14 January 2009, Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >>>> I'm sorry but I don't understand what the problem is.
> > >>>> Do you mean pci_disable_msix() doesn't work on some platforms?
> > >>> No, I don't. It was just confusion on my side, sorry.
> > >>>
> > >>> Please have a look at the new version of the patch I sent yesterday
> > >>> (http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=123185510828181&w=4).
> > >> BTW, in your patch the first dummy pci_enable_msix() allocates just one
> > >> vector, which means that the contents of both
> > >> msix_entries[idx_hppme].entry and msix_entries[idx_aer].entry will be the same,
> > >> if my reading of the spec (PCI 3.0 in this case) is correct.
> > >
> > > According to PCI 3.0 implementation note "Handling MSI-X Vector Shortage,"
> > > it seems your reading is not correct.
> > >
> > > Assume that the port have 4 entries([0-3]) in MSI-X table, and that entry[2]
> > > for hotplug/PME and entry[3] for AER, and that kernel only allocates 2 vector.
> > > Spec says that the port could be designed for software to configure entries
> > > assigning vectors{A,B} to multiple entries as ABAB, AABB, ABBB etc.
> > >
> > > So if there is just one vector, it could be AAAA.
>
> Our pci_enable_msix() doesn't do that. It will always do A---.
>
> > BTW, I don't think pci_enable_msix() allows this kind of configuration.
> > With the dummy pci_enable_msix() in my patch, it would be A---, I think.
>
> And that exactly is why I'm not sure it's correct.
>
> Namely, if only the first entry is configured, the device is only able to use
> one vector, represented by this entry, for any purpose. Now, for instance, for
> PCIE_CAPABILITIES_REG, there are two possibilities:
> (1) the value in the register always points to the _valid_ entry in the MSI-X
> table and that would be the first one,
> (2) the value in the register may point to an _invalid_ entry (1 - 3).
>
> You seem to assume that (2) is the case, but I'm not sure (that should follow
> from the PCI Express spec, but it clearly doesn't, at least I couldn't find
> any pointer in the spec). IMO it wouldn't make sense, because the port
> wouldn't have been able to generate interrupts for this service if only one
> vector had been configured.
>
> Still, even though (2) is the case, but both PCIE_CAPABILITIES_REG and
> PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS just happen to point to the same entry, which very well may
> be possible, the second pci_enable_msix() in your patch will fail.
>
> In any case, I think we should
> (a) get the number of the port's MSI-X table entries _first_, without enabling
> MSI-X,
> (b) allocate as many MSI-X vectors as indicated by this number, even though
> some of them may not be used,
> (c) use PCIE_CAPABILITIES_REG and PCI_ERR_ROOT_STATUS to check
> which vector has been allocated to which service.
(d) mask the unused vectors.
Thanks,
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-15 19:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-04 22:46 [PATCH 0/8] PCI Express port driver fixes and cleanups Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-04 22:48 ` [PATCH 1/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Remove root ports MSI quirk Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-09 23:12 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-09 23:18 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-09 23:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-04 22:49 ` [PATCH 2/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Aviod using service devices with wrong interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-09 23:23 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-04 22:51 ` [PATCH 3/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Remove unused device extension Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-09 23:23 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-04 22:54 ` [PATCH 4/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Do not enable port device before setting up interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-09 23:25 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-04 22:55 ` [PATCH 5/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Fix allocation of interrupts Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-08 3:02 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-08 7:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-08 8:20 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-08 16:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-08 20:45 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-09 23:33 ` Jesse Barnes
2009-01-09 23:38 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-13 2:47 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-13 11:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-14 6:08 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-14 10:35 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-14 10:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-15 6:24 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-15 7:38 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2009-01-15 10:31 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-15 16:42 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-15 19:05 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2009-01-15 19:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-16 7:33 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2009-01-16 9:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-17 0:20 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-19 1:52 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2009-01-19 6:27 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-13 2:34 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2009-01-04 22:57 ` [PATCH 6/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Remove unnecessary function Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-04 22:59 ` [PATCH 7/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Simplily probe callback of service drivers Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-07 12:15 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-04 23:01 ` [PATCH 8/8] PCI PCIe portdrv: Remove struct pcie_port_service_id Rafael J. Wysocki
2009-01-07 12:16 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200901152005.25370.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
--cc=kaneshige.kenji@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome