Re: [PATCH v8 03/14] cxl/hdm: Use stored Component Register mappings to map HDM decoder capability
From: Dan Williams
Date: Mon Aug 07 2023 - 23:01:22 EST
Robert Richter wrote:
> Dan,
>
> On 03.07.23 17:39:38, Dan Williams wrote:
> > Terry Bowman wrote:
> > > From: Robert Richter <rrichter@xxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Now, that the Component Register mappings are stored, use them to
> > > enable and map the HDM decoder capabilities. The Component Registers
> > > do not need to be probed again for this, remove probing code.
> > >
> > > The HDM capability applies to Endpoints, USPs and VH Host Bridges. The
> > > Endpoint's component register mappings are located in the cxlds and
> > > else in the port's structure. Provide a helper function
> > > cxl_port_get_comp_map() to locate the mappings depending on the
> > > component's type.
> >
> > This causes a regression that cxl_test tripped over. It's likely
> > something you could reproduce without cxl_test just be reloading the
> > cxl_port driver. Root cause below, but here is what I see on a test run:
> >
> > # meson test -C build --suite cxl
> > ninja: no work to do.
> > ninja: Entering directory `/root/git/ndctl/build'
> > [113/113] Linking target ndctl/ndctl
> > 1/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-topology.sh OK 12.78s
> > 2/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-region-sysfs.sh OK 7.72s
> > 3/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-labels.sh FAIL 1.53s (exit status 129 or signal 1 SIGHUP)
> > >>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/root/git/ndctl/build/cxl/lib:/root/git/ndctl/build/ndctl/lib:/root/git/ndctl/build/daxctl/lib NDCTL=/root/git/ndctl/build/ndctl/ndctl DAXCTL=/root/git/ndctl/build/daxctl/daxctl MALLOC_PERTURB_=67 TEST_PATH=/root/git/ndctl/build/test DATA_PATH=/root/git/ndctl/test /bin/bash /root/git/ndctl/test/cxl-labels.sh
>
> I have tried various combinations of revisions and setups (patch #3,
> #5 and #14, ndctl:pending/v77, cxl_test only with both, "ACPI0017" and
> cxl_pci_probe() disabled), but could not reproduce this. Tests always
> pass for me:
Apologies for the long delay in getting back to this. July had some
major personal interrupts to attend.
>
> [51/51] Linking target ndctl/ndctl
> 1/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-topology.sh OK 18.59s
> 2/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-region-sysfs.sh OK 12.26s
> 3/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-labels.sh OK 28.25s
> 4/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-create-region.sh OK 19.56s
> 5/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-xor-region.sh OK 10.57s
> 6/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-security.sh OK 9.77s
>
> Ok: 6
> Expected Fail: 0
> Fail: 0
> Unexpected Pass: 0
> Skipped: 0
> Timeout: 0
>
> Full log written to /root/ndctl/build/meson-logs/testlog.txt
So it turns out it is not cxl_test that is failing instead it is the
tests noticing a regression of the VH base case. I am running
cxl-topology.sh in a QEMU environment with a local device defined, and
that local device is hitting a probe regression.
When cxl_test goes to count the expected disabled devices it sees one
more because the QEMU device is also disabled.
++ jq 'map(select(.state == "disabled")) | length'
+ count=5
+ (( count == 4 ))
+ err 170
++ basename /root/git/ndctl/test/cxl-topology.sh
+ echo test/cxl-topology.sh: failed at line 170
...i.e. only 4 devices are expected to be disabled, not the 5th one that
was not on the cxl_test bus. I assume you are running without any other
CXL devices?
I will look into making that a more formalized case so that failure is
not QEMU configuration dependent, but please make sure that QEMU CXL
configs do not regress.
> >
> > 4/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-create-region.sh OK 17.05s
> > 5/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-xor-region.sh OK 5.18s
> > 6/6 ndctl:cxl / cxl-security.sh OK 4.68s
> >
> > Ok: 5
> > Expected Fail: 0
> > Fail: 1
> > Unexpected Pass: 0
> > Skipped: 0
> > Timeout: 0
> >
> > Full log written to /root/git/ndctl/build/meson-logs/testlog.txt
> >
> > It's not that cxl-labels.sh causes the error, it is loading and
> > unloading the port driver trips over the problem below:
> >
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@xxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@xxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> > > 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c b/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > > index 4449b34a80cc..b0f59e63e0d2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > > @@ -81,26 +81,6 @@ static void parse_hdm_decoder_caps(struct cxl_hdm *cxlhdm)
> > > cxlhdm->interleave_mask |= GENMASK(14, 12);
> > > }
> > >
> > > -static int map_hdm_decoder_regs(struct cxl_port *port, void __iomem *crb,
> > > - struct cxl_component_regs *regs)
> > > -{
> > > - struct cxl_register_map map = {
> > > - .dev = &port->dev,
> > > - .resource = port->component_reg_phys,
> > > - .base = crb,
> > > - .max_size = CXL_COMPONENT_REG_BLOCK_SIZE,
> > > - };
> > > -
> > > - cxl_probe_component_regs(&port->dev, crb, &map.component_map);
> > > - if (!map.component_map.hdm_decoder.valid) {
> > > - dev_dbg(&port->dev, "HDM decoder registers not implemented\n");
> > > - /* unique error code to indicate no HDM decoder capability */
> > > - return -ENODEV;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - return cxl_map_component_regs(&map, regs, BIT(CXL_CM_CAP_CAP_ID_HDM));
> > > -}
> > > -
> > > static bool should_emulate_decoders(struct cxl_endpoint_dvsec_info *info)
> > > {
> > > struct cxl_hdm *cxlhdm;
> > > @@ -145,6 +125,22 @@ static bool should_emulate_decoders(struct cxl_endpoint_dvsec_info *info)
> > > return true;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static struct cxl_register_map *cxl_port_get_comp_map(struct cxl_port *port)
> > > +{
> > > + /*
> > > + * HDM capability applies to Endpoints, USPs and VH Host
> > > + * Bridges. The Endpoint's component register mappings are
> > > + * located in the cxlds.
> > > + */
> > > + if (is_cxl_endpoint(port)) {
> > > + struct cxl_memdev *memdev = to_cxl_memdev(port->uport_dev);
> > > +
> > > + return &memdev->cxlds->comp_map;
> >
> > ...but why? The issue here is that the @dev argument in that map is the
> > memdev parent PCI device. However, in this context the @dev for devm
> > operations wants to be &port->dev.
>
> The cxl_pci driver stores the comp_map of the endpoint in the cxlds
> structure, struct cxl_port is not yet available at this point.
When you say "this point" you mean "that point" in cxl_pci, right? I
initially took that to mean literally "this" point in the quoted code
above.
> See patch #2 of this series ("cxl/pci: Store the endpoint's Component
> Register mappings in struct cxl_dev_state").
>
> >
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return &port->comp_map;
> >
> > ...so this is fine, and folding in the following resolves the test
> > failure.
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c b/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > index b0f59e63e0d2..6f111f487795 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/hdm.c
> > @@ -125,22 +125,6 @@ static bool should_emulate_decoders(struct cxl_endpoint_dvsec_info *info)
> > return true;
> > }
> >
> > -static struct cxl_register_map *cxl_port_get_comp_map(struct cxl_port *port)
> > -{
> > - /*
> > - * HDM capability applies to Endpoints, USPs and VH Host
> > - * Bridges. The Endpoint's component register mappings are
> > - * located in the cxlds.
> > - */
> > - if (is_cxl_endpoint(port)) {
> > - struct cxl_memdev *memdev = to_cxl_memdev(port->uport_dev);
> > -
> > - return &memdev->cxlds->comp_map;
> > - }
> > -
> > - return &port->comp_map;
> > -}
> > -
> > /**
> > * devm_cxl_setup_hdm - map HDM decoder component registers
> > * @port: cxl_port to map
> > @@ -160,8 +144,7 @@ struct cxl_hdm *devm_cxl_setup_hdm(struct cxl_port *port,
> > cxlhdm->port = port;
> > dev_set_drvdata(dev, cxlhdm);
> >
> > - comp_map = cxl_port_get_comp_map(port);
> > -
> > + comp_map = &port->comp_map;
>
> Can you check if the following works instead, I think the
> pre-initialization is missing in cxl_mock_mem_probe() for
> cxl_test:
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> index d6d067fbee97..4c4e33de4d74 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c
> @@ -1333,6 +1333,8 @@ struct cxl_memdev_state *cxl_memdev_state_create(struct device *dev)
> mutex_init(&mds->mbox_mutex);
> mutex_init(&mds->event.log_lock);
> mds->cxlds.dev = dev;
> + mds->cxlds.comp_map.dev = dev;
> + mds->cxlds.comp_map.resource = CXL_RESOURCE_NONE;
This has the same problem. @dev is specifying the lifetime of the
mapping. The lifetime of the mapping needs to be relative to the driver
using the registers. So if the cxl_port driver is mapping the component
registers the only valid device in the comp_map is &port->dev.
I notice that cxl_port_get_comp_map() endpoint port as an argument. That
endpoint port was instantiated with @cxlmd, but it seems not with
@cxlmd->cxlds->comp_map information which is available. Lets just fix
that. I.e. move devm_cxl_add_endpoint() into the core and make it
initialize @endpoint->comp_map with @cxlds->comp_map while switching
@dev in the @endpoint->comp_map to be @endpoint->dev, and not
@cxlds->dev.
...but it turns out that is the second bug in this patch. As I went to
try to reproduce this failure for a single port VH configuration I
notice another bug, a regression of this fix:
7bba261e0aa6 cxl/port: Scan single-target ports for decoders
...because there is no requirement for single port switches /
host-bridges to have HDM decoders per the specification, and the
original patch is turning HDM decoders not present as a hard failure.
> mds->cxlds.type = CXL_DEVTYPE_CLASSMEM;
>
> return mds;
> --
> 2.30.2
>
> The cxl_pci driver always has something valid or fails otherwise.
Understood, just copy that map at __devm_cxl_add_port() time. I am
thinking devm_cxl_add_endpoint() moves into core/port.c and it calls
__devm_cxl_add_port() directly with a new parameter to take a passed in
@comp_map or @component_reg_phys for the switch port case.
>
> If that works the change should be merged into patch #2.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Robert
>
>
> > if (comp_map->resource == CXL_RESOURCE_NONE) {
> > if (info && info->mem_enabled) {
> > cxlhdm->decoder_count = info->ranges;
> >
> >
> > Am I missing why the cxlds->comp_map needs to be reused?
> >
> > Note that I am out and may not be able to respond further until next
> > week.