| Message ID | 1501917313-9812-1-git-send-email-dingtianhong@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add new PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING flag | expand |
From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 15:15:09 +0800 > Some devices have problems with Transaction Layer Packets with the Relaxed > Ordering Attribute set. This patch set adds a new PCIe Device Flag, > PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING, a set of PCI Quirks to catch some known > devices with Relaxed Ordering issues, and a use of this new flag by the > cxgb4 driver to avoid using Relaxed Ordering with problematic Root Complex > Ports. > > It's been years since I've submitted kernel.org patches, I appolgise for the > almost certain submission errors. Which tree should merge this? The PCI tree or my networking tree?
On 2017/8/7 11:47, David Miller wrote: > From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> > Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2017 15:15:09 +0800 > >> Some devices have problems with Transaction Layer Packets with the Relaxed >> Ordering Attribute set. This patch set adds a new PCIe Device Flag, >> PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING, a set of PCI Quirks to catch some known >> devices with Relaxed Ordering issues, and a use of this new flag by the >> cxgb4 driver to avoid using Relaxed Ordering with problematic Root Complex >> Ports. >> >> It's been years since I've submitted kernel.org patches, I appolgise for the >> almost certain submission errors. > > Which tree should merge this? The PCI tree or my networking tree? > Hi David： I think networking tree merge it is a better choice, as it mainly used to tell the NIC drivers how to use the Relaxed Ordering Attribute, and later we need send patch to enable RO for ixgbe driver base on this patch. But I am not sure whether Bjorn has some of his own view. :) Hi Bjorn: Could you help review this patch or give some feedback ? Thanks Ding > . >
From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:13:17 +0800 > Hi David： > > I think networking tree merge it is a better choice, as it mainly used to tell the NIC > drivers how to use the Relaxed Ordering Attribute, and later we need send patch to enable > RO for ixgbe driver base on this patch. But I am not sure whether Bjorn has some of his own > view. :) > > Hi Bjorn: > > Could you help review this patch or give some feedback ? I'm still waiting on this... Bjorn?
On Mon, Aug 07, 2017 at 02:14:48PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> > Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 12:13:17 +0800 > > > Hi David： > > > > I think networking tree merge it is a better choice, as it mainly used to tell the NIC > > drivers how to use the Relaxed Ordering Attribute, and later we need send patch to enable > > RO for ixgbe driver base on this patch. But I am not sure whether Bjorn has some of his own > > view. :) > > > > Hi Bjorn: > > > > Could you help review this patch or give some feedback ? > > I'm still waiting on this... > > Bjorn? I was on vacation Friday-today, but I'll look at this series this week.
Some devices have problems with Transaction Layer Packets with the Relaxed Ordering Attribute set. This patch set adds a new PCIe Device Flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING, a set of PCI Quirks to catch some known devices with Relaxed Ordering issues, and a use of this new flag by the cxgb4 driver to avoid using Relaxed Ordering with problematic Root Complex Ports. It's been years since I've submitted kernel.org patches, I appolgise for the almost certain submission errors. v2: Alexander point out that the v1 was only a part of the whole solution, some platform which has some issues could use the new flag to indicate that it is not safe to enable relaxed ordering attribute, then we need to clear the relaxed ordering enable bits in the PCI configuration when initializing the device. So add a new second patch to modify the PCI initialization code to clear the relaxed ordering enable bit in the event that the root complex doesn't want relaxed ordering enabled. The third patch was base on the v1's second patch and only be changed to query the relaxed ordering enable bit in the PCI configuration space to allow the Chelsio NIC to send TLPs with the relaxed ordering attributes set. This version didn't plan to drop the defines for Intel Drivers to use the new checking way to enable relaxed ordering because it is not the hardest part of the moment, we could fix it in next patchset when this patches reach the goal. v3: Redesigned the logic for pci_configure_relaxed_ordering when configuration, If a PCIe device didn't enable the relaxed ordering attribute default, we should not do anything in the PCIe configuration, otherwise we should check if any of the devices above us do not support relaxed ordering by the PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING flag, then base on the result if we get a return that indicate that the relaxed ordering is not supported we should update our device to disable relaxed ordering in configuration space. If the device above us doesn't exist or isn't the PCIe device, we shouldn't do anything and skip updating relaxed ordering because we are probably running in a guest. v4: Rename the functions pcie_get_relaxed_ordering and pcie_disable_relaxed_ordering according John's suggestion, and modify the description, use the true/false as the return value. We shouldn't enable relaxed ordering attribute by the setting in the root complex configuration space for PCIe device, so fix it for cxgb4. Fix some format issues. v5: Removed the unnecessary code for some function which only return the bool value, and add the check for VF device. Make this patch set base on 4.12-rc5. v6: Fix the logic error in the need to enable the relaxed ordering attribute for cxgb4. v7: The cxgb4 drivers will enable the PCIe Capability Device Control[Relaxed Ordering Enable] in PCI Probe() routine, this will break our current solution for some platform which has problematic when enable the relaxed ordering attribute. According to the latest recommendations, remove the enable_pcie_relaxed_ordering(), although it could not cover the Peer-to-Peer scene, but we agree to leave this problem until we really trigger it. Make this patch set base on 4.12 release version. v8: Change the second patch title and description to make it more reasonable, add the acked-by from Alex and Ashok. Add a new patch to enable the Relaxed Ordering Attribute for cxgb4vf driver. Make this patch set base on 4.13-rc2. v9: The document (https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/9e/ bc/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf) indicate that the Xeon processors based on Broadwell/Haswell microarchitecture has the problem with Relaxed Ordering Attribute enabled, so add the whole list Device ID from Intel to the patch. Casey Leedom (3): PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING net/cxgb4: Use new PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING flag net/cxgb4vf: Use new PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING flag Ding Tianhong (1): PCI: Disable PCIe Relaxed Ordering if unsupported drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4.h | 1 + drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cxgb4_main.c | 23 +++++++++---- drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/sge.c | 5 +-- drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4vf/adapter.h | 1 + .../net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4vf/cxgb4vf_main.c | 18 ++++++++++ drivers/net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4vf/sge.c | 3 ++ drivers/pci/pci.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++ drivers/pci/probe.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/pci/quirks.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++ include/linux/pci.h | 4 +++ 10 files changed, 151 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) -- 1.8.3.1