Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 01 May 2018 15:30:57 +0530 | From | poza@codeauro ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH v14 0/9] Address error and recovery for AER and DPC |
| |
On 2018-05-01 04:10, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 11:00:52AM +0530, poza@codeaurora.org wrote: >> On 2018-04-23 20:53, Oza Pawandeep wrote: >> > This patch set brings in error handling support for DPC >> > >> > 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 (for e.g. ERR_FATAL), callbacks are handled appropriately. >> > >> > The goal of the patch-set is: >> > DPC should handle the error handling and recovery similar to AER, >> > because >> > finally both are attempting recovery in some or the other way, >> > and for that error handling and recovery framework has to be loosely >> > coupled. >> > ... > >> Hi Bjorn, >> >> I know I need to rebase this whole patch-set to 4.17 now. >> >> But before I do that, can you please help to comment. > > My overall comment is that I think the series will be simpler and read > better if you first change AER to do remove/re-enumerate, before doing > anything with DPC. > > This could be done by extracting just the AER part of "PCI/AER/DPC: > Align FATAL error handling for AER and DPC" (i.e., adding > pcie_do_fatal_recovery()) and moving that to be the very first patch. > > It's a small change in terms of code size, but significant to drivers, > and it's really the core of the series, so it would be good to clearly > establish the policy of: > > ERR_NONFATAL => call driver recovery entry points > ERR_FATAL => remove and re-enumerate > > before bringing DPC into the picture. > > Then the subsequent patches would all be more or less mechanical > changes to make DPC follow the same model.
ok I have taken care of you comment, please follow v15, coming next. I could not make that the first patch, because I needed to unify pci_wait_for_link function. hence it is the second patch, but now the order looks quiet obvious and simplified.
Regards, Oza.
> > Bjorn
| |