On Tue, 20 May 2025, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 04:15:56PM -0700, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy wrote: > > On 5/19/25 2:35 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelg...@google.com> > > > > > > DPC Error Source ID is only valid when the DPC Trigger Reason indicates > > > that DPC was triggered due to reception of an ERR_NONFATAL or ERR_FATAL > > > Message (PCIe r6.0, sec 7.9.14.5). > > > > > > When DPC was triggered by ERR_NONFATAL > > > (PCI_EXP_DPC_STATUS_TRIGGER_RSN_NFE) > > > or ERR_FATAL (PCI_EXP_DPC_STATUS_TRIGGER_RSN_FE) from a downstream device, > > > log the Error Source ID (decoded into domain/bus/device/function). Don't > > > print the source otherwise, since it's not valid. > > > > > > For DPC trigger due to reception of ERR_NONFATAL or ERR_FATAL, the dmesg > > > logging changes: > > > > > > - pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: containment event, status:0x000d source:0x0200 > > > - pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: ERR_FATAL detected > > > + pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: containment event, status:0x000d, ERR_FATAL > > > received from 0000:02:00.0 > > > > > > and when DPC triggered for other reasons, where DPC Error Source ID is > > > undefined, e.g., unmasked uncorrectable error: > > > > > > - pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: containment event, status:0x0009 source:0x0200 > > > - pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: unmasked uncorrectable error detected > > > + pci 0000:00:01.0: DPC: containment event, status:0x0009: unmasked > > > uncorrectable error detected > > > > > > Previously the "containment event" message was at KERN_INFO and the > > > "%s detected" message was at KERN_WARNING. Now the single message is at > > > KERN_WARNING. > > > > Since we are handling Uncorrectable errors, why not use pci_err? > > Sounds reasonable to me. I would do it in a separate patch because > the point of this one is to avoid logging junk when Error Source ID is > not valid. > > > > + pci_warn(pdev, "containment event, status:%#06x, %s received > > > from %04x:%02x:%02x.%d\n", > > > + status, > > > > I see the BDF extraction and format code in many places in the PCI > > drivers. May be a common macro will make it more readable. > > Good idea. Not sure how to implement it, so I put that on my TODO > list for now.
Instead of macros, it might be worth adding a printf specifier for this. Together with some flags, it should be possible to cover also the variations that print less than the full BDF format. > > > + (reason == PCI_EXP_DPC_STATUS_TRIGGER_RSN_FE) ? > > > + "ERR_FATAL" : "ERR_NONFATAL", > > > + pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus), PCI_BUS_NUM(source), > > > + PCI_SLOT(source), PCI_FUNC(source)); > -- i.
