All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xuyandong <xuyandong2@huawei.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: avoid bridge feature re-probing on hotplug
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2018 13:49:50 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181220194950.GD183878@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181218004455.20186-1-mst@redhat.com>

Hi Michael,

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 07:45:41PM -0500, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> commit 1f82de10d6b1 ("PCI/x86: don't assume prefetchable ranges are 64bit")
> added probing of bridge support for 64 bit memory each time bridge is
> re-enumerated.
> 
> Unfortunately this probing is destructive if any device behind
> the bridge is in use at this time.
> 
> This was observed in the field, see
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-12/msg01711.html
> and specifically
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2018-12/msg02082.html
> 
> There's no real need to re-probe the bridge features as the
> registers in question never change - detect that using
> the memory flag being set (it's always set on the 1st pass since
> all PCI2PCI bridges support memory forwarding) and skip the probing.
> Thus, only the first call will perform the disruptive probing and sets
> the resource flags as required - which we can be reasonably sure happens
> before any devices have been configured.
> Avoiding repeated calls to pci_bridge_check_ranges might be even nicer.
> Unfortunately I couldn't come up with a clean way to do it without a
> major probing code refactoring.

I'm OK with major probe code refactoring as long as it's done
carefully.  Doing a special-case fix like this solves the immediate
problem but adds to the long-term maintenance problem.

As far as I can tell, everything in pci_bridge_check_ranges() should
be done once at enumeration-time, e.g., in the pci_read_bridge_bases()
path, and pci_bridge_check_ranges() itself should be removed.

If that turns out to be impossible for some reason, we need a comment
explaining why.

> Reported-by: xuyandong <xuyandong2@huawei.com>
> Tested-by: xuyandong <xuyandong2@huawei.com>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
> Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> Please review and consider for stable.
> 
> changes from v1:
> 	comment and commit log updates to address comments by Bjorn.
> 
>  drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 10 ++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> index ed960436df5e..d5c25d465d97 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
> @@ -741,6 +741,16 @@ static void pci_bridge_check_ranges(struct pci_bus *bus)
>  	struct resource *b_res;
>  
>  	b_res = &bridge->resource[PCI_BRIDGE_RESOURCES];
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Don't re-check after this was called once already:
> +	 * important since bridge might be in use.
> +	 * Note: this is only reliable because as per spec all PCI to PCI
> +	 * bridges support memory unconditionally so IORESOURCE_MEM is set.
> +	 */
> +	if (b_res[1].flags & IORESOURCE_MEM)
> +		return;
> +
>  	b_res[1].flags |= IORESOURCE_MEM;
>  
>  	pci_read_config_word(bridge, PCI_IO_BASE, &io);
> -- 
> MST

  reply	other threads:[~2018-12-20 19:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-18  0:45 [PATCH v2] PCI: avoid bridge feature re-probing on hotplug Michael S. Tsirkin
2018-12-20 19:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2018-12-20 21:26   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2018-12-20 22:31     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-12-20 22:36       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-01-07 15:01         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-01-15  4:07         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-01-15 22:23           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-01-19 20:12 ` [PATCH v3] " Bjorn Helgaas
2019-01-20 14:49   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-01-22  5:31   ` xuyandong
2019-01-22 13:53     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-01-22 18:58     ` Bjorn Helgaas

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=20181220194950.GD183878@google.com \
    --to=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xuyandong2@huawei.com \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.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.