lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] arm64: PCI: Enable SMC conduit
From
Date
Hi,

On 2/25/21 3:30 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:43:30PM -0500, Jon Masters wrote:
>> Hi Bjorn, all,
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:31 PM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:46:04AM -0600, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Does that mean its open season for ECAM quirks, and we can expect
>> > them to start being merged now?
>>
>> "Open season" makes me cringe because it suggests we have a license to
>> use quirks indiscriminately forever, and I hope that's not the case.
>>
>> Lorenzo is closer to this issue than I am and has much better insight
>> into the mess this could turn into. From my point of view, it's
>> shocking how much of a hassle this is compared to x86. There just
>> aren't ECAM quirks, in-kernel clock management, or any of that crap.
>> I don't know how they do it on x86 and I don't have to care. Whatever
>> they need to do, they apparently do in AML. Eventually ARM64 has to
>> get there as well if vendors want distro support.
>>
>> I don't want to be in the position of enforcing a draconian "no more
>> quirks ever" policy. The intent -- to encourage/force vendors to
>> develop spec-compliant machines -- is good, but it seems like the
>> reward of having compliant machines "just work" vs the penalty of
>> having to write quirks and shepherd them upstream and into distros
>> will probably be more effective and not much slower.
>>
>>
>> The problem is that the third party IP vendors (still) make too much junk. For
>> years, there wasn't a compliance program (e.g. SystemReady with some of the
>> meat behind PCI-SIG compliance) and even when there was the third party IP
>> vendors building "root ports" (not even RCs) would make some junk with a hacked
>> up Linux kernel booting on a model and demo that as "PCI". There wasn't the
>> kind of adult supervision that was required. It is (slowly) happening now, but
>> it's years and years late. It's just embarrassing to see the lack of ECAM that
>> works. In many cases, it's because the IP being used was baked years ago or
>> made for some "non server" (as if there is such a thing) use case, etc. But in
>> others, there was a chance to do it right, and it still happens. Some of us
>> have lost what hair we had over the years getting third party IP vendors to
>> wake up and start caring about this.
>>
>> So there's no excuse. None at all. However, this is where we are. And it /is/
>> improving. But it's still too slow, and we have platforms still coming to
>> market that need to boot and run. Based on this, and the need to have something
>> more flexible than just solving for ECAM deficiencies (which are really just a
>> symptom), I can see the allure of an SMC. I don't like it, but if that's where
>> folks want to go, and if we can find a way to constrain the enthusiasm for it,
>> then perhaps it is a path forward. But if we are to go down that path it needs
>> to come with a giant warning from the kernel that a system was booted at is
>> relying on that. Something that will cause an OS certification program to fail
>> without a waiver, or will cause customers to phone up for support wondering why
>> the hw is broken. It *must* not be a silent thing. It needs to be "this
>> hardware is broken and non-standard, get the next version fixed".
>
> It is a stance I agree with in many respects, it should be shared (it
> was in HTML format - the lists unfortunately dropped the message) so I
> am replying to it to make it public.


So, the V3 of this set has a pr_info of "PCI: SMC conduit attached to
segment %d". I will respin with that at pr_warn() which seems to fulfill
the comment above. Is that "giant" enough, or should it be higher/worded
differently?

Thanks,


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-25 23:33    [W:0.058 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site