From: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@gmail.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] PCI/EDR: Remove CONFIG_PCIE_EDR
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 15:46:17 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261103204617.GC314988@yaz-khff2.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261020181924.3003553-4-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2026 at 11:19:20AM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> Error Disconnect Recover (EDR) is the ACPI half of the hybrid DPC model,
> where firmware owns DPC and notifies the OS of containment events.
>
> CONFIG_PCIE_EDR made EDR optional on top of CONFIG_PCIE_DPC. This adds
> another knob to the decision to request DPC control in _OSC. The OS
> requests DPC control only if it also supports EDR, so with
> CONFIG_PCIE_EDR=n it never requests DPC control. There is little reason
> to build DPC without EDR on ACPI systems.
>
> Remove the option and build edr.c whenever CONFIG_PCIE_DPC and
> CONFIG_ACPI are both enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig | 9 ---------
> drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile | 5 ++++-
> drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c | 5 +++--
> include/linux/pci-acpi.h | 4 ++--
> 5 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> index a1a9c06012f8..b0e0b33e3254 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_root.c
> @@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ static u32 calculate_support(void)
> support |= OSC_PCI_ASPM_SUPPORT | OSC_PCI_CLOCK_PM_SUPPORT;
> if (pci_msi_enabled())
> support |= OSC_PCI_MSI_SUPPORT;
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_EDR))
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC))
> support |= OSC_PCI_EDR_SUPPORT;
>
> return support;
> @@ -515,9 +515,9 @@ static u32 calculate_control(void)
> * Per the Downstream Port Containment Related Enhancements ECN to
> * the PCI Firmware Spec, r3.2, sec 4.5.1, table 4-5,
> * OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL indicates the OS supports both DPC
> - * and EDR.
> + * and EDR. EDR is always built with DPC on ACPI systems.
> */
> - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC) && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_EDR))
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC))
> control |= OSC_PCI_EXPRESS_DPC_CONTROL;
>
> return control;
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig
> index 207c2deae35f..de4ea33b4524 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/Kconfig
> @@ -137,12 +137,3 @@ config PCIE_PTM
> This is only useful if you have devices that support PTM, but it
> is safe to enable even if you don't.
>
> -config PCIE_EDR
> - bool "PCI Express Error Disconnect Recover support"
> - depends on PCIE_DPC && ACPI
> - help
> - This option adds Error Disconnect Recover support as specified
> - in the Downstream Port Containment Related Enhancements ECN to
> - the PCI Firmware Specification r3.2. Enable this if you want to
> - support hybrid DPC model which uses both firmware and OS to
> - implement DPC.
What about keeping 'PCIE_EDR' and using it like 'PCIE_PME'?
IOW, remove the user-visible parts have it default to (PCIE_DPC &&
ACPI)?
I understand EDR as its own feature on top of DPC. So I think there's
value in having the EDR bits clearly distinct from the DPC bits.
Also, it would reduce the changes in this patch.
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile b/drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile
> index b0b43a18c304..46b24311f659 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/Makefile
> @@ -13,4 +13,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PCIEAER_INJECT) += aer_inject.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_PME) += pme.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC) += dpc.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_PTM) += ptm.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_EDR) += edr.o
> +
> +ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DPC) += edr.o
> +endif
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> index 104ff2b91f1f..71adc0e94bca 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/dpc.c
> @@ -109,10 +109,11 @@ bool pci_dpc_recovered(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> /*
> * Synchronization between hotplug and DPC is not supported
> - * if DPC is owned by firmware and EDR is not enabled.
> + * if DPC is owned by firmware and there is no EDR, i.e., on
> + * non-ACPI systems.
> */
> host = pci_find_host_bridge(pdev->bus);
> - if (!host->native_dpc && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCIE_EDR))
> + if (!host->native_dpc && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI))
> return false;
>
This seems like dead code, and it was deleted in an older version.
The conditions seem to be mutually exclusive.
Maybe it should just be removed in a pre-patch?
Thanks,
Yazen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 20:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-20 18:19 [PATCH v2 0/6] PCI/DPC: Decide DPC ownership with host_bridge->native_dpc Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] PCI/DPC: Avoid access to non-existent AER capability Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-11-03 19:47 ` Yazen Ghannam
2026-11-03 20:25 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-11-03 21:00 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] PCI/DPC: Reinstate support for AER-incapable ports Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-11-03 20:14 ` Yazen Ghannam
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] PCI/EDR: Remove CONFIG_PCIE_EDR Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-11-03 20:46 ` Yazen Ghannam [this message]
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] PCI/portdrv: Don't require AER to bind DPC service Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] PCI/ACPI: Request DPC control only together with AER control Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-20 18:19 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] PCI/portdrv: Bind DPC service based on host_bridge->native_dpc Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
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=20261103204617.GC314988@yaz-khff2.amd.com \
--to=yazen.ghannam@amd.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=oohall@gmail.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®