Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Raj, Ashok | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 11:00 AM | | On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:46:07PM +, Casey Leedom wrote: | > | From: Raj, Ashok | > | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM | > | ... | > | As Casey pointed out in an earlier

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Raj, Ashok | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 11:00 AM | | On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:46:07PM +, Casey Leedom wrote: | > | From: Raj, Ashok | > | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM | > | ... | > | As Casey pointed out in an earlier thread, we choose the heavy hammer | > |

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:46:07PM +, Casey Leedom wrote: > | From: Raj, Ashok > | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM > | ... > | As Casey pointed out in an earlier thread, we choose the heavy hammer > | approach because there are some that can lead to

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 04:46:07PM +, Casey Leedom wrote: > | From: Raj, Ashok > | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM > | ... > | As Casey pointed out in an earlier thread, we choose the heavy hammer > | approach because there are some that can lead to data-corruption as opposed > | to

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Raj, Ashok | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM | ... | As Casey pointed out in an earlier thread, we choose the heavy hammer | approach because there are some that can lead to data-corruption as opposed | to perf degradation. Careful. As far as I'm aware,

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Raj, Ashok | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 8:58 AM | ... | As Casey pointed out in an earlier thread, we choose the heavy hammer | approach because there are some that can lead to data-corruption as opposed | to perf degradation. Careful. As far as I'm aware, there is no Data

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Ding Tianhong | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 5:17 AM | | On 2017/8/9 11:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: | > | > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: | > > | >> | From: Bjorn Helgaas | >> | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Ding Tianhong | Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2017 5:17 AM | | On 2017/8/9 11:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: | > | > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: | > > | >> | From: Bjorn Helgaas | >> | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM | >> | ... | >> | It should also include

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

Hi Bjorn On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 06:22:00PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 03:15:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > > From: Casey Leedom > > > > Root complexes don't obey PCIe 3.0 ordering rules, hence could lead to > > data-corruption. > > This needs

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

Hi Bjorn On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 06:22:00PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 03:15:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > > From: Casey Leedom > > > > Root complexes don't obey PCIe 3.0 ordering rules, hence could lead to > > data-corruption. > > This needs to include a link

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On 2017/8/9 11:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: >> | From: Bjorn Helgaas >> | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM >> | >> | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec >> | >>

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On 2017/8/9 11:02, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: >> | From: Bjorn Helgaas >> | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM >> | >> | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec >> | >>

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: > | From: Bjorn Helgaas > | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM > | > | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec > | >

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 01:40:01AM +, Casey Leedom wrote: > | From: Bjorn Helgaas > | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM > | > | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec > | >

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Bjorn Helgaas | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM | | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec | (https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/9e/bc/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf, | sec 3.9.1). In the commit message or as a

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

| From: Bjorn Helgaas | Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 4:22 PM | | This needs to include a link to the Intel spec | (https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/9e/bc/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.pdf, | sec 3.9.1). In the commit message or as a comment? Regardless, I

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 03:15:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > From: Casey Leedom > > The patch adds a new flag PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING to indicate that > Relaxed Ordering (RO) attribute should not be used for Transaction Layer > Packets (TLP) targetted towards

Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

On Sat, Aug 05, 2017 at 03:15:10PM +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > From: Casey Leedom > > The patch adds a new flag PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING to indicate that > Relaxed Ordering (RO) attribute should not be used for Transaction Layer > Packets (TLP) targetted towards these affected root

[PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

From: Casey Leedom The patch adds a new flag PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING to indicate that Relaxed Ordering (RO) attribute should not be used for Transaction Layer Packets (TLP) targetted towards these affected root complexes. Current list of affected parts include some

[PATCH v9 1/4] PCI: Add new PCIe Fabric End Node flag, PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING

From: Casey Leedom The patch adds a new flag PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_RELAXED_ORDERING to indicate that Relaxed Ordering (RO) attribute should not be used for Transaction Layer Packets (TLP) targetted towards these affected root complexes. Current list of affected parts include some Intel Xeon