All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Yuanquan-B41889 <B41889@freescale.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: "Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, galak@kernel.crashing.org,
	r61911@freescale.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	松本博郎 <matsumoto.hiroo@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [linuxppc-release][PATCH] powerpc/pci-hotplug: fix init issue of rescanned pci device
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 19:23:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50C08048.3050305@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo6mCm79m87MchL=Y1jxxgZ2Mio8d2L+Sg8CLvxRKue8sg@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/06/2012 05:30 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Chen Yuanquan-B41889
> <B41889@freescale.com> wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 04:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:20 +0800, Chen Yuanquan-B41889 wrote:
>>>> On 12/05/2012 03:17 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 10:31 +0800, Yuanquan Chen wrote:
>>>>>> On powerpc arch, some fixup work of PCI/PCI-e device is just done
>>>>>> during the
>>>>>> first scan at booting time. For the PCI/PCI-e device rescanned after
>>>>>> linux OS
>>>>>> booting up, the fixup work won't be done, which leads to dma_set_mask
>>>>>> error or
>>>>>> irq related issue in rescanned PCI/PCI-e device's driver. So, it does
>>>>>> the same
>>>>>> fixup work for the rescanned device to avoid this issue.
>>>>> Hrm, the patch is a bit gross. First the code shouldn't be copy/pasted
>>>>> that way but factored out.
>>> Please, at least format your email properly so I can try to undertand
>>> without needing aspirin.
>>>
>>>> There's a judgement "if (!bus->is_added)" before calling of
>>>> pcibios_fixup_bus in pci_scan_child_bus, so for the rescanned device,
>>>> the fixup won't execute, which leads to fatal error in driver of
>>>> rescanned
>>>> device on freescale  powerpc, no this issues on x86 arch.
>>> First, none of that invalidates my statement that you shouldn't
>>> duplicate a whole block of code like this. Even if your approach is
>>> correct (which is debated separately), at the very least you should
>>> factor the code out into a common function between the two copies.
>>>
>>>> Remove the judgement, let it to do the pcibios_fixup_bus
>>>> directly, the error won't occur for the rescanned device. But it's
>>>> general code, not proper to change here, so copy the pcibios_fixup_bus
>>>> work to  pcibios_enable_device.
>>>>
>>>>> I'm surprised also that is_added is false when pcibios_enable_device()
>>>>> gets called ... that looks strange to me. At what point is that enable
>>>>> happening in the hotplug sequence ?
>>>> All devices are rescanned and then call the pci_enable_devices and
>>>> pci_bus_add_devices.
>>> Where ? How ? What is the sequence happening ? In any case, I think if
>>> we need a proper fixup done per-device like that after scan we ought to
>>> create a new hook at the generic level rather than that sort of hack.
>>>
>> echo 1 > rescan to trigger dev_rescan_store:
>>
>> dev_rescan_store->pci_rescan_bus->pci_scan_child_bus,
>> pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources,
>> pci_enable_bridges, pci_bus_add_devices
>>
>> pci_enable_bridges->pci_enable_device->__pci_enable_device_flags->do_pci_enable_device->
>> pcibios_enable_device
>>
>> pci_bus_add_devices->pci_bus_add_device->"dev->is_added = 1"
>>
>> Yeah, it's general fixup code for every rescanned PCI/PCI-e device on
>> powerpc at runtime. So if
>> we want to call it in a ppc_md member, we need to wrap it as a function and
>> assign it in every ppc_md,
>> it isn't proper for the general code.
>>
>> Regards,
>> yuanquan
>>
>>
>>>> The patch code will be called by pci_enable_devices. The "dev->is_added"
>>>> is set in pci_bus_add_device
>>>> which is called by pci_bus_add_devices. So "dev->is_added" is false when
>>>> checking it in pcibios_enable_device
>>>> for the rescanned device.
>>> Who calls pci_enable_device() in the rescan case ? Why isn't it left to
>>> the driver ? I don't think we can rely on that behaviour not to change.
>>>
>>>>> How do you trigger the rescan anyway ?
>>>> Use the interface under /sys :
>>>> echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/xxx/remove
>>>>
>>>> then echo 1 to the pci device which is the bus of the removed device
>>>> echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/xxxx/rescan
>>>> the removed device will be scanned and it's driver module will be loaded
>>>> automatically.
>>> Yeah this code path are known to be fishy. I think the problem is at the
>>> generic abstraction level and that's where it needs to be fixed.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ben.
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> yuanquan
>>>>> I think the problem needs to be solve at a higher level, I'm adding
>>>>> linux-pci & Bjorn to the CC list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ben.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yuanquan Chen <B41889@freescale.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> index 7f94f76..f0fb070 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> @@ -1496,6 +1496,26 @@ int pcibios_enable_device(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>>>> int mask)
>>>>>>                  if (ppc_md.pcibios_enable_device_hook(dev))
>>>>>>                          return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>     +    if (!dev->is_added) {
>>>>>> +               /*
>>>>>> +                * Fixup NUMA node as it may not be setup yet by the
>>>>>> generic
>>>>>> +                * code and is needed by the DMA init
>>>>>> +                */
>>>>>> +               set_dev_node(&dev->dev, pcibus_to_node(dev->bus));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Hook up default DMA ops */
>>>>>> +               set_dma_ops(&dev->dev, pci_dma_ops);
>>>>>> +               set_dma_offset(&dev->dev, PCI_DRAM_OFFSET);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Additional platform DMA/iommu setup */
>>>>>> +               if (ppc_md.pci_dma_dev_setup)
>>>>>> +                       ppc_md.pci_dma_dev_setup(dev);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Read default IRQs and fixup if necessary */
>>>>>> +               pci_read_irq_line(dev);
>>>>>> +               if (ppc_md.pci_irq_fixup)
>>>>>> +                       ppc_md.pci_irq_fixup(dev);
>>>>>> +       }
>>>>>>          return pci_enable_resources(dev, mask);
>>>>>>     }
> Is this the same issue Hiroo MATSUMOTO was working on earlier?
> (http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/50080)

Yeah, that's the exact problem I encountered. Please push it forward.

Thanks,
yuanquan

> We went round and round on those patches (partly my fault for
> excessive bike-shedding), and then we stalled out because of an
> ordering issue with CardBus init and an IRQ quirk.
>
> Here's the last status I remember:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=135006501620378&w=2
>
> Bjorn
>
>
>



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Chen Yuanquan-B41889 <B41889@freescale.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: 松本博郎 <matsumoto.hiroo@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, r61911@freescale.com,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [linuxppc-release][PATCH] powerpc/pci-hotplug: fix init issue of rescanned pci device
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 19:23:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50C08048.3050305@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo6mCm79m87MchL=Y1jxxgZ2Mio8d2L+Sg8CLvxRKue8sg@mail.gmail.com>

On 12/06/2012 05:30 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Chen Yuanquan-B41889
> <B41889@freescale.com> wrote:
>> On 12/05/2012 04:26 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 16:20 +0800, Chen Yuanquan-B41889 wrote:
>>>> On 12/05/2012 03:17 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2012-12-05 at 10:31 +0800, Yuanquan Chen wrote:
>>>>>> On powerpc arch, some fixup work of PCI/PCI-e device is just done
>>>>>> during the
>>>>>> first scan at booting time. For the PCI/PCI-e device rescanned after
>>>>>> linux OS
>>>>>> booting up, the fixup work won't be done, which leads to dma_set_mask
>>>>>> error or
>>>>>> irq related issue in rescanned PCI/PCI-e device's driver. So, it does
>>>>>> the same
>>>>>> fixup work for the rescanned device to avoid this issue.
>>>>> Hrm, the patch is a bit gross. First the code shouldn't be copy/pasted
>>>>> that way but factored out.
>>> Please, at least format your email properly so I can try to undertand
>>> without needing aspirin.
>>>
>>>> There's a judgement "if (!bus->is_added)" before calling of
>>>> pcibios_fixup_bus in pci_scan_child_bus, so for the rescanned device,
>>>> the fixup won't execute, which leads to fatal error in driver of
>>>> rescanned
>>>> device on freescale  powerpc, no this issues on x86 arch.
>>> First, none of that invalidates my statement that you shouldn't
>>> duplicate a whole block of code like this. Even if your approach is
>>> correct (which is debated separately), at the very least you should
>>> factor the code out into a common function between the two copies.
>>>
>>>> Remove the judgement, let it to do the pcibios_fixup_bus
>>>> directly, the error won't occur for the rescanned device. But it's
>>>> general code, not proper to change here, so copy the pcibios_fixup_bus
>>>> work to  pcibios_enable_device.
>>>>
>>>>> I'm surprised also that is_added is false when pcibios_enable_device()
>>>>> gets called ... that looks strange to me. At what point is that enable
>>>>> happening in the hotplug sequence ?
>>>> All devices are rescanned and then call the pci_enable_devices and
>>>> pci_bus_add_devices.
>>> Where ? How ? What is the sequence happening ? In any case, I think if
>>> we need a proper fixup done per-device like that after scan we ought to
>>> create a new hook at the generic level rather than that sort of hack.
>>>
>> echo 1 > rescan to trigger dev_rescan_store:
>>
>> dev_rescan_store->pci_rescan_bus->pci_scan_child_bus,
>> pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources,
>> pci_enable_bridges, pci_bus_add_devices
>>
>> pci_enable_bridges->pci_enable_device->__pci_enable_device_flags->do_pci_enable_device->
>> pcibios_enable_device
>>
>> pci_bus_add_devices->pci_bus_add_device->"dev->is_added = 1"
>>
>> Yeah, it's general fixup code for every rescanned PCI/PCI-e device on
>> powerpc at runtime. So if
>> we want to call it in a ppc_md member, we need to wrap it as a function and
>> assign it in every ppc_md,
>> it isn't proper for the general code.
>>
>> Regards,
>> yuanquan
>>
>>
>>>> The patch code will be called by pci_enable_devices. The "dev->is_added"
>>>> is set in pci_bus_add_device
>>>> which is called by pci_bus_add_devices. So "dev->is_added" is false when
>>>> checking it in pcibios_enable_device
>>>> for the rescanned device.
>>> Who calls pci_enable_device() in the rescan case ? Why isn't it left to
>>> the driver ? I don't think we can rely on that behaviour not to change.
>>>
>>>>> How do you trigger the rescan anyway ?
>>>> Use the interface under /sys :
>>>> echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/xxx/remove
>>>>
>>>> then echo 1 to the pci device which is the bus of the removed device
>>>> echo 1 > /sys/bus/pci/devices/xxxx/rescan
>>>> the removed device will be scanned and it's driver module will be loaded
>>>> automatically.
>>> Yeah this code path are known to be fishy. I think the problem is at the
>>> generic abstraction level and that's where it needs to be fixed.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Ben.
>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> yuanquan
>>>>> I think the problem needs to be solve at a higher level, I'm adding
>>>>> linux-pci & Bjorn to the CC list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ben.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yuanquan Chen <B41889@freescale.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> index 7f94f76..f0fb070 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci-common.c
>>>>>> @@ -1496,6 +1496,26 @@ int pcibios_enable_device(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>>>> int mask)
>>>>>>                  if (ppc_md.pcibios_enable_device_hook(dev))
>>>>>>                          return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>     +    if (!dev->is_added) {
>>>>>> +               /*
>>>>>> +                * Fixup NUMA node as it may not be setup yet by the
>>>>>> generic
>>>>>> +                * code and is needed by the DMA init
>>>>>> +                */
>>>>>> +               set_dev_node(&dev->dev, pcibus_to_node(dev->bus));
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Hook up default DMA ops */
>>>>>> +               set_dma_ops(&dev->dev, pci_dma_ops);
>>>>>> +               set_dma_offset(&dev->dev, PCI_DRAM_OFFSET);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Additional platform DMA/iommu setup */
>>>>>> +               if (ppc_md.pci_dma_dev_setup)
>>>>>> +                       ppc_md.pci_dma_dev_setup(dev);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +               /* Read default IRQs and fixup if necessary */
>>>>>> +               pci_read_irq_line(dev);
>>>>>> +               if (ppc_md.pci_irq_fixup)
>>>>>> +                       ppc_md.pci_irq_fixup(dev);
>>>>>> +       }
>>>>>>          return pci_enable_resources(dev, mask);
>>>>>>     }
> Is this the same issue Hiroo MATSUMOTO was working on earlier?
> (http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.ppc.embedded/50080)

Yeah, that's the exact problem I encountered. Please push it forward.

Thanks,
yuanquan

> We went round and round on those patches (partly my fault for
> excessive bike-shedding), and then we stalled out because of an
> ordering issue with CardBus init and an IRQ quirk.
>
> Here's the last status I remember:
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-pci&m=135006501620378&w=2
>
> Bjorn
>
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-06 11:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-05  2:31 [linuxppc-release][PATCH] powerpc/pci-hotplug: fix init issue of rescanned pci device Yuanquan Chen
2012-12-05  7:17 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-12-05  7:17   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-12-05  8:20   ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2012-12-05  8:20     ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2012-12-05  8:26     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-12-05  8:26       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2012-12-05  9:29       ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2012-12-05  9:29         ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2012-12-05 21:30         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-12-05 21:30           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-12-06 11:23           ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889 [this message]
2012-12-06 11:23             ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2012-12-07 21:15             ` Bjorn Helgaas
2012-12-07 21:15               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-04-01 10:29               ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2013-04-01 10:29                 ` Chen Yuanquan-B41889
2013-04-01 16:29                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-04-01 16:29                   ` 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=50C08048.3050305@freescale.com \
    --to=b41889@freescale.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=galak@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=matsumoto.hiroo@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=r61911@freescale.com \
    /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.