From: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
aik@ozlabs.ru, benh@kernel.crashing.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/6] powerpc/powernv: don't enable SRIOV when VF BAR contains non M64 BAR
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 22:10:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150806141010.GD6235@richard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150806043557.GA28524@gwshan>
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 02:35:57PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>>On PHB_IODA2, we enable SRIOV devices by mapping IOV BAR with M64 BARs. If
>>a SRIOV device's BAR is not 64-bit prefetchable, this is not assigned from
>>M64 windwo, which means M64 BAR can't work on it.
>>
>
>s/PHB_IODA2/PHB3
>s/windwo/window
>
>>This patch makes this explicit.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
>The idea sounds right, but there is one question as below.
>
>>---
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c | 25 +++++++++----------------
>> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>>diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>>index 5738d31..9b41dba 100644
>>--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>>+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>>@@ -908,9 +908,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_resource_shift(struct pci_dev *dev, int offset)
>> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
>> continue;
>>
>>- if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
>>- continue;
>>-
>> /*
>> * The actual IOV BAR range is determined by the start address
>> * and the actual size for num_vfs VFs BAR. This check is to
>>@@ -939,9 +936,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_resource_shift(struct pci_dev *dev, int offset)
>> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
>> continue;
>>
>>- if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
>>- continue;
>>-
>> size = pci_iov_resource_size(dev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
>> res2 = *res;
>> res->start += size * offset;
>>@@ -1221,9 +1215,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_assign_m64(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 num_vfs)
>> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
>> continue;
>>
>>- if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
>>- continue;
>>-
>> for (j = 0; j < vf_groups; j++) {
>> do {
>> win = find_next_zero_bit(&phb->ioda.m64_bar_alloc,
>>@@ -1510,6 +1501,12 @@ int pnv_pci_sriov_enable(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 num_vfs)
>> pdn = pci_get_pdn(pdev);
>>
>> if (phb->type == PNV_PHB_IODA2) {
>>+ if (!pdn->vfs_expanded) {
>>+ dev_info(&pdev->dev, "don't support this SRIOV device"
>>+ " with non M64 VF BAR\n");
>>+ return -EBUSY;
>>+ }
>>+
>
>It would be -ENOSPC since -EBUSY indicates the devices (VFs) are temparily
>unavailable. For this case, the VFs are permanently unavailable because of
>running out of space to accomodate M64 and non-M64 VF BARs.
>
>The error message could be printed with dev_warn() and it would be precise
>as below or something else you prefer:
>
> dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "SRIOV not supported because of non-M64 VF BAR\n");
>
Thanks for the comment, will change accordingly.
>
>> /* Calculate available PE for required VFs */
>> mutex_lock(&phb->ioda.pe_alloc_mutex);
>> pdn->offset = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(
>>@@ -2774,9 +2771,10 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> if (!res->flags || res->parent)
>> continue;
>> if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags)) {
>>- dev_warn(&pdev->dev, " non M64 VF BAR%d: %pR\n",
>>+ dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Don't support SR-IOV with"
>>+ " non M64 VF BAR%d: %pR. \n",
>> i, res);
>>- continue;
>>+ return;
>> }
>>
>> size = pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
>>@@ -2795,11 +2793,6 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> res = &pdev->resource[i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES];
>> if (!res->flags || res->parent)
>> continue;
>>- if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags)) {
>>- dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Skipping expanding VF BAR%d: %pR\n",
>>- i, res);
>>- continue;
>>- }
>
>When any one IOV BAR on the PF is non-M64, none of the VFs can be enabled.
>Will we still allocate/assign M64 or M32 resources for the IOV BARs? If so,
>I think it can be avoided.
>
Don't get your point. You mean to avoid this function?
Or clear the IOV BAR when we found one of it is non-M64?
>>
>> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, " Fixing VF BAR%d: %pR to\n", i, res);
>> size = pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
>>--
>>1.7.9.5
>>
--
Richard Yang
Help you, Help me
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-06 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-29 7:22 [PATCH] powerpc/powernv: use one M64 BAR in Single PE mode for one VF BAR Wei Yang
2015-07-30 1:15 ` Gavin Shan
2015-07-30 5:43 ` Wei Yang
2015-07-31 0:13 ` Gavin Shan
2015-07-31 2:01 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05 1:24 ` [PATCH V2 0/6] Redesign SR-IOV on PowerNV Wei Yang
2015-08-05 1:24 ` [PATCH V2 1/6] powerpc/powernv: don't enable SRIOV when VF BAR contains non M64 BAR Wei Yang
2015-08-06 4:35 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 6:10 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 6:57 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 7:47 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 11:07 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 14:13 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 1:24 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 14:10 ` Wei Yang [this message]
2015-08-07 1:20 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 2:24 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 3:50 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 7:14 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-10 1:40 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05 1:24 ` [PATCH V2 2/6] powerpc/powernv: simplify the calculation of iov resource Wei Yang
2015-08-06 4:51 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 9:00 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 9:41 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 10:15 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-07 1:36 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 13:49 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 1:08 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-05 1:25 ` [PATCH V2 3/6] powerpc/powernv: use one M64 BAR in Single PE mode for one VF BAR Wei Yang
2015-08-06 5:20 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 9:36 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 10:07 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 1:48 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 8:13 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 10:04 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-07 2:01 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 8:59 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-10 1:48 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05 1:25 ` [PATCH V2 4/6] powerpc/powernv: replace the hard coded boundary with gate Wei Yang
2015-08-06 5:26 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 9:11 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-05 1:25 ` [PATCH V2 5/6] powerpc/powernv: boundary the total vf bar size instead of the individual one Wei Yang
2015-08-06 5:28 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 14:03 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 1:23 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 2:25 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05 1:25 ` [PATCH V2 6/6] powerpc/powernv: allocate discrete PE# when using M64 BAR in Single PE mode Wei Yang
2015-08-06 5:36 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 13:41 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 1:36 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 2:33 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 3:43 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 5:44 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 5:54 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07 6:25 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 10:00 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150806141010.GD6235@richard \
--to=weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.