Re: [PATCH v3 5/9] perf/cxl: Accept an overflow interrupt on MSI message number 0
Richard Cheng <[email protected]> Mon, 3 Aug 2026 13:57:37 +0800
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-cxl,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <anAs42gO1Yd7MCid@MWDK4CY14F> |
On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 04:28:23PM +0800, Dave Jiang wrote:
> cxl_pmu_probe() rejects the PMU when info->msi_vec <= 0, but that field
> holds the MSI/MSI-X message number the device signals overflow on. The
> field is 0-based, and -1 means no interrupt support. Message number 0 is
> valid and pci_irq_vector() takes a 0-based index, so a compliant device
> signalling on the first vector fails to probe.
>
> Reject only the no-interrupt case, matching how the CXL mailbox and event
> interrupts handle it.
>
> Fixes: 5d7107c72796 ("perf: CXL Performance Monitoring Unit driver")
> Reported-by: [email protected]
> Closes: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1
> Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-8
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Davidlohr Bueso <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[email protected]>
> ---
> v3:
> - Rebase on the preceding patch, so this tests info->msi_vec rather than
> info->irq. The fix is unchanged and the hunk is still one line.
> - Not guarding against pci_irq_vector()'s INTx fallback for vector 0, which
> it returns when neither MSI nor MSI-X is enabled. A v3 draft added a
> pci_dev_msi_enabled() check for that, but a modern CXL device wiring up
> INTx is not a realistic prospect, and the consequence otherwise is a PMU
> that counts nothing rather than anything unsafe. Left alone to keep this
> a one-liner.
> ---
> drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c b/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
> index 56e6ae7bebf7..c9e30cb149df 100644
> --- a/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/perf/cxl_pmu.c
> @@ -875,7 +875,7 @@ static int cxl_pmu_probe(struct device *dev)
> .capabilities = PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE,
> };
>
> - if (info->msi_vec <= 0)
> + if (info->msi_vec < 0)
> return -EINVAL;
>
Hi Dave,
I agree that 0 is a legal message number, but do we need to check whether
MSI is actually enabled ?
something like
"""
if (info->msi_vec < 0 || (!pdev->msi_enabled && !pdev->msix_enabled))
return -EINVAL;
"""
Best regards,
Richard Cheng
> rc = pci_irq_vector(pdev, info->msi_vec);
> --
> 2.55.0
>
>