On Nov 25, 2020 / 07:49, Keith Busch wrote:
> It turns out some PCIe slots report hotplug surprise but are not hotplug
> capable. Despite the contridiction, the spec seems to allow that.
>
> The linux pciehp driver needs hotplug capable to bind to the slot, and
> the block/019 test requires hotplug surprise to handle the unannounced
> link-down. Verify both bits in the slot capabilities register are set.
>
> Reported-by: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@xxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Keith Busch <kbusch@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> common/rc | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/common/rc b/common/rc
> index 0d7a3cd..d396fb5 100644
> --- a/common/rc
> +++ b/common/rc
> @@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ _require_test_dev_in_hotplug_slot() {
>
> local slt_cap
> slt_cap="$(setpci -s "${parent}" CAP_EXP+14.w)"
> - if [[ $((0x${slt_cap} & 0x20)) -eq 0 ]]; then
> + if [[ $((0x${slt_cap} & 0x60)) -ne 0x60 ]]; then
> SKIP_REASON="$TEST_DEV is not in a hot pluggable slot"
> return 1
> fi
> --
> 2.24.1
>
Thank you Keith.
I saw some mother boards report "hotplug surprise" bit to PCIe slots with
SAS-HBA, but do not report "hotplug capable" bit. Without the fix, block/019
was executed to the HDDs connected to the SAS-HBA, and the HDDs disappear after
the test case run (the test case emulates hotplug, but the PCIe slot is not
hotplug capable). I confirmed that this fix checks the both bits and skips
the test case for the HDDs.
Omar, please consider this fix to upstream.
Tested-by: Shinichiro Kawasaki <shinichiro.kawasaki@xxxxxxx>
--
Best Regards,
Shin'ichiro Kawasaki
