Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] ice: irdma hardware init failed after suspend/resume

[En-Wei WU]

Thank you for your reply.

> Sorry for being unclear. I meant, does resuming the system take longer
> now? (initcall_debug might give a clue.)
I've tested the S3 suspend/resume with the initcall_debug kernel
command option, and it shows no clear difference between having or not
having the ice_init_rdma in ice_resume:
Without ice_init_rdma:
```
[  104.241129] ice 0000:86:00.0: PM: pci_pm_resume+0x0/0x110 returned
0 after 9415 usecs
[  104.241206] ice 0000:86:00.1: PM: pci_pm_resume+0x0/0x110 returned
0 after 9443 usecs
```
With ice_init_rdma:
```
[  122.749022] ice 0000:86:00.1: PM: pci_pm_resume+0x0/0x110 returned
0 after 9485 usecs
[  122.749068] ice 0000:86:00.0: PM: pci_pm_resume+0x0/0x110 returned
0 after 9532 usecs
```

> And ice_init_rdma should be moved to ice_rebuild (replace ice_plug_aux_dev)
We can defer the ice_init_rdma to the later service task by adopting this.

> You should call ice_deinit_rdma in ice_prepare_for_reset (replace ice_unplug_aux_dev),
It seems like we must call ice_deinit_rdma in ice_suspend. If we call
it in the later service task, it will:
1. break some existing code setup by ice_resume
2. Since the PCI-X vector table is flushed at the end of ice_suspend,
we have no way to release PCI-X vectors for rdma if we had allocated
it dynamically
The second point is important since we didn't release the PCI-X
vectors for rdma (if we allocated it dynamically) in the original
ice_suspend, and it's somewhat like a leak in the original code.

Best regards,
Ricky.

On Thu, 30 May 2024 at 04:19, Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Dear En-Wei,
>
>
> Thank you for responding so quickly.
>
> Am 29.05.24 um 05:17 schrieb En-Wei WU:
>
> […]
>
> >> What effect does this have on resume time?
> >
> > When we call ice_init_rdma() at resume time, it will allocate entries
> > at pf->irq_tracker.entries and update pf->msix_entries for later use
> > (request_irq) by irdma.
>
> Sorry for being unclear. I meant, does resuming the system take longer
> now? (initcall_debug might give a clue.)
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul