Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] arm_mpam: propagate MSC access errors for state saving function
Andre Przywara <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.acpi.devel,gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, On 7/24/26 12:07, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 05:54:50PM +0200, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Allow the mpam_save_mbwu_state() function to return an error, and >> propagate read and write errors from the lower level up. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <[email protected]> >> --- >> drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> index bcff53477133..6329443c451f 100644 >> --- a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> +++ b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> @@ -1833,22 +1833,37 @@ static int mpam_save_mbwu_state(void *arg) >> >> mon_sel = FIELD_PREP(MSMON_CFG_MON_SEL_MON_SEL, i) | >> FIELD_PREP(MSMON_CFG_MON_SEL_RIS, ris->ris_idx); >> - mpam_write_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MON_SEL, mon_sel); >> - mpam_read_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MBWU_FLT, &cur_flt); >> - mpam_read_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MBWU_CTL, &cur_ctl); >> - mpam_write_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MBWU_CTL, 0); >> + ret = mpam_write_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MON_SEL, mon_sel); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + ret = mpam_read_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MBWU_FLT, &cur_flt); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + ret = mpam_read_monsel_reg(msc, CFG_MBWU_CTL, &cur_ctl); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; > > How does it work in general with PCC. Now that you can fail at any point, > what happens to the write that occurs before a failed read like above one. > Who will take care of erasing those new writes or it doesn't matter ? > Just checking as I don't have much knowledge on MPAM intrinsics. TBH I don't know, but I think we consider MPAM botched at this point, and just stop the driver, similar to an error IRQ? But I am not sure this is properly implemented at this point. The focus of these first six patches was merely to lay the dirty groundwork for *being able* to handle errors, and do this now rather than in the future. Cheers, Andre