On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:47:12PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > > The spec is recommending code to use "Hotplug Surprise" to differentiate > these two cases we are looking for. > > The use case Keith is looking for is for hotplug support. > The case I and Oza are more interested is for error handling on platforms > with no hotplug support. > > According to the spec, if "Hotplug Surprise" is set in slot capabilities, > then hotplug driver handles link up and DPC driver doesn't interfere with > its operation. Hotplug driver observes link up interrupt like it is doing today. > When link up event is observed, hotplug driver will do the enumeration. > > If "Hotplug Surprise" bit is not set, it is the job of the DPC driver to > bring up the link. I believe this path should follow the AER driver path > as there is a very well defined error reporting and recovery framework > in the code. > > The link comes back up automatically when DPC driver handles its interrupt > very similar to what secondary bus reset does for AER. I don't believe > there is a hotplug possibility under this condition since it is not supported > to begin with. > > Should we plumb the "Hotplug Surprise" condition into the code to satisfy > both cases and leave the error handling path according to this code series? I'm on board with this, but I think you mean "Hotplug Capable" rather than "Hotplug Surprise". The former may co-exist with DPC and handles the link-ups, leaving DPC responsible for handling the link-down. The "Hotplug Surprise" capability is recommended to not co-exist with DPC since that capability may suppress the "surprise link down" notification that DPC needs to see in order to trigger. If the "Hotplug Capable" bit is not set, detecting the link-up after a DPC event would have to fall under a different component's responsibility, so I think I'm finally seeing your point.
