Re: [PATCH 0/2] PCI/AER: Consistently use _OSC to determine who owns AER

[Sinan Kaya]

On 11/19/2018 11:53 AM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 11:53:05AM -0500, Tyler Baicar wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 8:49 PM Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 11/15/2018 3:16 PM, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> > > > I've asked around a few people at Dell and they unanimously agree that
> > > > _OSC is the correct way to determine ownership of AER. In linux, we
> > > > use the result of _OSC to enable AER services, but we use HEST to
> > > > determine AER ownership. That's inconsistent. This series drops the
> > > > use of HEST in favor of _OSC.
> > > >
> > > > [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/11/15/62
> > >
> > > This change breaks the existing systems that rely on the HEST table
> > > telling the operating system about firmware first presence.
> > >
> > > Besides, HEST table has much more granularity about which PCI component
> > > needs firmware such as global/device/switch.
> > >
> > > You should probably circulate these ideas for wider consumption in UEFI
> > > forum as UEFI owns the HEST table definition.
> >
> > I agree with Sinan, this will break existing systems, and the granularity of the
> > HEST definition is more useful than the single bit in _OSC.
>
> But we're not using HEST as a fine grain control. We disable native AER
> handling if *any* device has FF set in HEST, and that just forces people
> to use pcie_ports=native to get around that.

I don't see *any* in the code.  aer_hest_parse() does the HEST table parsing.
It switches to firmware first mode if global flag in HEST is set. Otherwise
for each BDF in device, hest_match_pci() is used to do a cross-matching against
HEST table contents.

Am I missing something?