On 2018-04-16 20:16, Sinan Kaya wrote:
On 4/15/2018 11:17 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
It doesn't seem right to me that we handle both ERR_NONFATAL and
ERR_FATAL events differently if we happen to have DPC support in a
switch.
Maybe we should consider triggering DPC only on ERR_FATAL? That would
k
On 4/15/2018 11:17 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> It doesn't seem right to me that we handle both ERR_NONFATAL and
> ERR_FATAL events differently if we happen to have DPC support in a
> switch.
>
> Maybe we should consider triggering DPC only on ERR_FATAL? That would
> keep DPC out of the ERR_NONFATA
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 11:21:15AM +0530, p...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> On 2018-04-16 11:03, p...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > On 2018-04-16 08:47, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > > On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:53:17AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > >
> > > > You indicated that you want to unify the AER and DPC
On 2018-04-16 11:03, p...@codeaurora.org wrote:
On 2018-04-16 08:47, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:53:17AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
You indicated that you want to unify the AER and DPC behavior. Let's
settle on what we want to do one more time. We have been going forth
and ba
On 2018-04-16 08:47, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:53:17AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
You indicated that you want to unify the AER and DPC behavior. Let's
settle on what we want to do one more time. We have been going forth
and back on the direction.
My thinking is that as muc
On Sat, Apr 14, 2018 at 11:53:17AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> You indicated that you want to unify the AER and DPC behavior. Let's
> settle on what we want to do one more time. We have been going forth
> and back on the direction.
My thinking is that as much as possible, similar events should be
Hi Keith, Bjorn;
On 4/12/2018 1:41 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 4/12/2018 1:09 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:27:20PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>>> On 4/12/2018 11:02 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
Also, I thought the plan was to keep hotplug and non-hotplug the same,
exc
On 4/12/2018 1:09 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:27:20PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>> On 4/12/2018 11:02 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, I thought the plan was to keep hotplug and non-hotplug the same,
>>> except for the very end: if not a hotplug bridge, initiate the resca
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 12:27:20PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 4/12/2018 11:02 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> >
> > Also, I thought the plan was to keep hotplug and non-hotplug the same,
> > except for the very end: if not a hotplug bridge, initiate the rescan
> > automatically after releasing from co
On 4/12/2018 11:02 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 08:39:54AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:34:37AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>>> On 4/12/2018 10:06 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
I think the scenario you are describing is two systems that are
iden
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 08:39:54AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:34:37AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> > On 4/12/2018 10:06 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the scenario you are describing is two systems that are
> > > identical except that in the first, the endpo
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 10:34:37AM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 4/12/2018 10:06 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >
> > I think the scenario you are describing is two systems that are
> > identical except that in the first, the endpoint is below a hotplug
> > bridge, while in the second, it's below a no
On 4/12/2018 10:06 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Alex because of his interest in device reset]
>
> For context, here's the part of the patch we're discussing:
>
static void dpc_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct dpc_dev *dpc = container_of(work, struct dpc_dev, wor
[+cc Alex because of his interest in device reset]
For context, here's the part of the patch we're discussing:
> >> static void dpc_work(struct work_struct *work)
> >> {
> >> struct dpc_dev *dpc = container_of(work, struct dpc_dev, work);
> >> struct pci_dev *pdev = dpc->dev->po
On 4/10/2018 5:03 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> DPC and AER should attempt recovery in the same way, except the
>> cases where system is with hotplug enabled.
> What's the connection with hotplug? I see from the patch that for
> hotplug bridges you remove the tree below the bridge, and otherwise
> y
On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 10:41:54AM -0400, Oza Pawandeep wrote:
> DPC and AER should attempt recovery in the same way, except the
> cases where system is with hotplug enabled.
What's the connection with hotplug? I see from the patch that for
hotplug bridges you remove the tree below the bridge, an
DPC and AER should attempt recovery in the same way, except the
cases where system is with hotplug enabled.
Signed-off-by: Oza Pawandeep
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-dpc.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-dpc.c
index 8e1553b..6d9a841 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-dpc.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/p
17 matches
Mail list logo
