Our initial VF control implementation was focused on providing
a very minimal support for the VF_STATE_NOTIFY events just to
meet GuC requirements, without tracking a VF state or doing any
expected actions (like cleanup in case of the FLR notification).
Try to improve this by defining set of VF state machines, each
responsible for processing one activity (PAUSE, RESUME, STOP or
FLR). All required steps defined by the VF state machine are then
executed by the PF worker from the dedicated workqueue.
Any external requests or notifications simply try to transition
between the states to trigger a work and then wait for that work
to finish. Some predefined default timeouts are used to avoid
changing existing API calls, but it should be easy to extend the
control API to also accept specific timeout values.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
Cc: Piotr Piórkowski <piotr.piorkowski@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Piórkowski <piotr.piorkowski@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240828210809.1528-5-michal.wajdeczko@intel.com
GuC will use VF_STATE_NOTIFY events to notify the PF about changes
of the VF state, in particular when a VF FLR was requested. Add
very minimal support for such events to avoid reporting errors due
to unexpected G2H. We will improve handling of these messages later.
While around also add few basic functions to control the VF state
(pause, resume, stop) as we will also exercise them soon.
Signed-off-by: Michal Wajdeczko <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Piotr Piórkowski <piotr.piorkowski@intel.com>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20240326191518.363-3-michal.wajdeczko@intel.com
