On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 11:05:44AM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 01:03:16PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 08:20:56PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > During the review of the patch that fixes DBI access in PCI EP, Rob > > > suggested [1] using a fixed interface for passing the events from EPC to > > > EPF instead of the in-kernel notifiers. > > > > > > This series introduces a simple callback based mechanism for passing the > > > events from EPC to EPF. This interface is chosen for satisfying the below > > > requirements: > > > > > > 1. The notification has to reach the EPF drivers without any additional > > > latency. > > > 2. The context of the caller (EPC) needs to be preserved while passing the > > > notifications. > > > > > > With the existing notifier mechanism, the 1st case can be satisfied since > > > notifiers aren't adding any huge overhead. But the 2nd case is clearly not > > > satisfied, because the current atomic notifiers forces the EPF > > > notification context to be atomic even though the caller (EPC) may not be > > > in atomic context. In the notification function, the EPF drivers are > > > required to call several EPC APIs that might sleep and this triggers a > > > sleeping in atomic bug during runtime. > > > > > > The above issue could be fixed by using a blocking notifier instead of > > > atomic, but that proposal was not accepted either [2]. > > > > > > So instead of working around the issues within the notifiers, let's get rid > > > of it and use the callback mechanism. > > > > > > NOTE: DRA7xx and TEGRA194 drivers are only compile tested. Testing this series > > > on the real platforms is greatly appreciated. > > > > > > > Lorenzo, can this series be merged for v6.2 since all the patches are reviewed > > now? > > Patch (2) isn't (or I missed something) - we should be looking for > review/testing on it. > Yes, 2/5 doesn't have a review tag yet. But as per comments from Vidya on v3 [1], I believe it is okay to get merged. But I'll ping on that patch anyway. Thanks, Mani [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/5ec4b46f-2590-bd34-f6fa-e4e2eeb38b7b@xxxxxxxxxx/ > Thanks, > Lorenzo > > > Thanks, > > Mani > > > > > Thanks, > > > Mani > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220802072426.GA2494@thinkpad/T/#mfa3a5b3a9694798a562c36b228f595b6a571477d > > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220228055240.24774-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > Changes in v4: > > > > > > * Added check for the presence of event_ops before involing the callbacks (Kishon) > > > * Added return with IRQ_WAKE_THREAD when link_up event is found in the hard irq > > > handler of tegra194 driver (Vidya) > > > * Collected review tags > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > > > > * As Kishon spotted, fixed the DRA7xx driver and also the TEGRA194 driver to > > > call the LINK_UP callback in threaded IRQ handler. > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > > > * Introduced a new "list_lock" for protecting the epc->pci_epf list and > > > used it in the callback mechanism. > > > > > > Manivannan Sadhasivam (5): > > > PCI: dra7xx: Use threaded IRQ handler for "dra7xx-pcie-main" IRQ > > > PCI: tegra194: Move dw_pcie_ep_linkup() to threaded IRQ handler > > > PCI: endpoint: Use a separate lock for protecting epc->pci_epf list > > > PCI: endpoint: Use callback mechanism for passing events from EPC to > > > EPF > > > PCI: endpoint: Use link_up() callback in place of LINK_UP notifier > > > > > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-dra7xx.c | 2 +- > > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c | 9 ++++- > > > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c | 38 ++++++------------- > > > drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c | 32 ++++++++++++---- > > > include/linux/pci-epc.h | 10 +---- > > > include/linux/pci-epf.h | 19 ++++++---- > > > 6 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > > > > > -- > > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம் -- மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
