"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpicc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> On 11/21/2017 12:35 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:14 PM, Guilherme G. Piccoli >> <gpicc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >>> On 11/16/2017 01:49 AM, Balbir Singh wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 2:27 AM, Guilherme G. Piccoli >>>> <gpicc...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: >>>>> During a kdump kernel boot in PowerPC, we request a reset of the PHBs >>>>> to the FW. It makes sense, since if we are booting a kdump kernel it >>>>> means we had some trouble before and we cannot rely in the adapters' >>>>> health; they could be in a bad state, hence the reset is needed. >>>>> >>>>> But this reset is useful not only in kdump - there are situations, >>>>> specially when debugging drivers, that we could break an adapter in >>>>> a way it requires such reset. One can tell to just go ahead and >>>>> reboot the machine, but happens that many times doing kexec is much >>>>> faster, and so preferable than a full power cycle. >>>>> >>>>> This patch adds the pci_reset_phbs parameter to perform such reset >>>>> when desired by the user. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Do we care to reset specific phbs or all of them? I guess all based on >>>> your description. >>> >>> Exactly Balbir, it does reset all of them. We could add such >>> granularity, but I don't see much usability.. >>> But if somebody feels it's useful, we can change... >>> >> >> OK.. makes sense, any reason why this can't be folded into reset_devices? >> I guess we want reset_phbs to be independent of reset_devices > > It was, in v1. But mpe asked it to be a powerpc specific parameter heheh LOL. Turtles. I still feel like we shouldn't be creating a generically named parameter like this, though we have done it many times in the past. Can we call it "ppc_reset_phbs". And then I'll merge it without further quibbling, honest. cheers
