PCI Error Recovery API Proposal (updated)

long tlnguyen at snoqualmie.dp.intel.com
Sat Apr 9 03:18:35 EST 2005

On Thursday, April 07, 2005 3:30 PM Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>Hrm... I don't think the port driver should enter that picture at all.
>As far as I'm concerned, the port driver is part of the implementation.
>The defined API really only concerns the downstream device. That is,the
>AER can use whatever private PCI-Express API you have to trigger the
>link reset. I think that's why we have some misunderstanding about the
>definition of this callback.

The port driver is a PCI device driver, which supports PCI Express
features. Each feature has its own service driver, which is not based on
PCI Driver Model. These service drivers should be informed of what is
going on in the hierarchy where fatal error occurs as well as what error
recovery action takes place. Therefore, in my view, the port driver
should be part of error recovery process, which is based on a native SW
solution, not a FW policy. I hope you understand my concerns and rewrite
the definition of this callback usage.

>In my view of things, it's just a call to the downstream device after
>the link have been reset, and thus is very similar to 2).

The difference in their usages is the reason why I've kept requesting
you to have API 3) for PCI Express.


More information about the Linuxppc64-dev mailing list