* [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/2] ARM: kernel: bios32: implement PCI device resources claiming
@ 2015-05-14 14:42 Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-14 14:42 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: " Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-14 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
The current ARM pcibios layer prevents PCI devices resources enablement
if the PCI_PROBE_ONLY global flag is set, since on systems that require
immutable PCI BARs set-up (ie probe only) the arm PCI bios layer does
not assign resources, hence resources are not really checked (ie claimed)
and they do not get assigned a parent, which causes pci_enable_resources
to fail in turn.
If the kernel tries to enable the resources for a PCI device through
pci_enable_resources, it would fail on PCI_PROBE_ONLY systems since the
device resources are not claimed (ie they are not assigned) on those
systems and the resource parent is left uninitialized (ie they have a
dangling parent pointer).
This behaviour does not conform with the expected kernel behaviour.
When a PCI device and its resources are scanned, the detected PCI
resources should be claimed in order to validate their values read
from the BARs set-up and should be assigned a parent resource so that the
resource hierarchy is initialized.
Resource claiming must be carried out on PCI_PROBE_ONLY systems
too, since it is a method for validating resources and it has nothing
to do with PCI_PROBE_ONLY flag.
This patch removes the pcibios_enable_device call from the arm bios32
implementation (which means that arm falls back to the generic weak
version for its implementation, that correctly enables a device resources)
and replaces it with an arm pcibios_add_device implementation, that claims
resources for a device, so that the behaviour becomes compliant with the
expected PCI device kernel initialization flow.
This way, resources are claimed and enabled on PCI_PROBE_ONLY systems
too improving the BAR set-up validation and making the arm kernel PCI
behaviour closer to other architectures.
Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
---
arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c b/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
index fcbbbb1..aace9ca 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/bios32.c
@@ -604,15 +604,25 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
}
/**
- * pcibios_enable_device - Enable I/O and memory.
- * @dev: PCI device to be enabled
+ * pcibios_add_device - Initialize device before adding it to PCI bus
+ * @dev: PCI device to be added
*/
-int pcibios_enable_device(struct pci_dev *dev, int mask)
+int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
{
- if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY))
- return 0;
+ struct resource *res;
+ int i;
+ /*
+ * Device resources are claimed to validate
+ * them and initialize their hierarchy structure
+ */
+ for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
+ res = &dev->resource[i];
+ if (res->parent || !res->flags)
+ continue;
+ pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
+ }
- return pci_enable_resources(dev, mask);
+ return 0;
}
int pci_mmap_page_range(struct pci_dev *dev, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
--
2.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-14 14:42 [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/2] ARM: kernel: bios32: implement PCI device resources claiming Lorenzo Pieralisi
@ 2015-05-14 14:42 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-19 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
0 siblings, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-14 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
checked.
This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
ARM64 systems.
Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
---
arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
@@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
*/
int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
{
+ struct resource *res;
+ int i;
+
dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
+ for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
+ res = &dev->resource[i];
+ if (res->parent || !res->flags)
+ continue;
+ pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
+ }
+
return 0;
}
--
2.2.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-14 14:42 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: " Lorenzo Pieralisi
@ 2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-18 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-20 8:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-19 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
1 sibling, 2 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Suravee Suthikulanit @ 2015-05-15 2:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 5/14/2015 9:42 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
> should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
> them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
> checked.
>
> This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
> the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
> are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
> ARM64 systems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
> */
> int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> + struct resource *res;
> + int i;
> +
> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>
> + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> + res = &dev->resource[i];
> + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> + continue;
> + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
> + }
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
>
Lorenzo/Bjorn,
I have tested this patch on top of Jayachandran's V2 patch series
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg40811.html) on AMD Seattle
(w/ PROBE_ONLY and non-PROBE_ONLY mode), and your changes here works
with additional changes below.
It seems that when booting w/ PROBE_ONLY case, we need to call
pci_read_bridge_bases() at some point before claiming the resources of
devices underneath the bridge. This is needed to determine the bridge
bases (i.e. bridge io, mmio and mmio_pref bases), and update bridge
resources accordingly.
---- BEGIN PATCH -----
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
index c0a88ca..57be6aa 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
@@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
+ if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
+ !pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) &&
+ !pci_bridge_bases_is_read(dev->bus))
+ pci_read_bridge_bases(dev->bus);
+
for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
res = &dev->resource[i];
if (res->parent || !res->flags)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
index 6675a7a..6cab8be 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
@@ -447,6 +447,13 @@ static void pci_read_bridge_mmio_pref(struct
pci_bus *child)
}
}
+bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus)
+{
+ return (bus->resource[0]->start ||
+ bus->resource[1]->start ||
+ bus->resource[2]->start);
+}
+
void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child)
{
struct pci_dev *dev = child->self;
diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
index 353db8d..11c674d 100644
--- a/include/linux/pci.h
+++ b/include/linux/pci.h
@@ -798,6 +798,7 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct
pci_bus *bus);
unsigned int pci_scan_child_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
void pci_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev);
void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child);
+bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus);
struct resource *pci_find_parent_resource(const struct pci_dev *dev,
struct resource *res);
u8 pci_swizzle_interrupt_pin(const struct pci_dev *dev, u8 pin);
---- END PATCH -----
I'm not sure if this is the best place to be reading the bridge bases.
I guess we should be able to do this when adding bridge devices.
Thanks,
Suravee
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
@ 2015-05-18 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-18 19:44 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-20 8:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-18 17:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Suravee,
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 03:09:03AM +0100, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
> On 5/14/2015 9:42 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
> > should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
> > them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
> > checked.
> >
> > This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
> > the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
> > are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
> > ARM64 systems.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
> > */
> > int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > {
> > + struct resource *res;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
> >
> > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> > + res = &dev->resource[i];
> > + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> > + continue;
> > + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
> > + }
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> >
>
> Lorenzo/Bjorn,
>
> I have tested this patch on top of Jayachandran's V2 patch series
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg40811.html) on AMD Seattle
> (w/ PROBE_ONLY and non-PROBE_ONLY mode), and your changes here works
> with additional changes below.
>
> It seems that when booting w/ PROBE_ONLY case, we need to call
> pci_read_bridge_bases() at some point before claiming the resources of
> devices underneath the bridge. This is needed to determine the bridge
> bases (i.e. bridge io, mmio and mmio_pref bases), and update bridge
> resources accordingly.
Thanks for testing, I will give it a go on Seattle, if you can drop
the log you get on PROBE_ONLY (without your patch below) that would be
great so that I can have a look at the issue.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
> ---- BEGIN PATCH -----
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index c0a88ca..57be6aa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>
> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>
> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
> + !pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) &&
> + !pci_bridge_bases_is_read(dev->bus))
> + pci_read_bridge_bases(dev->bus);
> +
> for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> res = &dev->resource[i];
> if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> index 6675a7a..6cab8be 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> @@ -447,6 +447,13 @@ static void pci_read_bridge_mmio_pref(struct
> pci_bus *child)
> }
> }
>
> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus)
> +{
> + return (bus->resource[0]->start ||
> + bus->resource[1]->start ||
> + bus->resource[2]->start);
> +}
> +
> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child)
> {
> struct pci_dev *dev = child->self;
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 353db8d..11c674d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -798,6 +798,7 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct
> pci_bus *bus);
> unsigned int pci_scan_child_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
> void pci_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev);
> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child);
> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus);
> struct resource *pci_find_parent_resource(const struct pci_dev *dev,
> struct resource *res);
> u8 pci_swizzle_interrupt_pin(const struct pci_dev *dev, u8 pin);
> ---- END PATCH -----
>
> I'm not sure if this is the best place to be reading the bridge bases.
> I guess we should be able to do this when adding bridge devices.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Suravee
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-18 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
@ 2015-05-18 19:44 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Suravee Suthikulanit @ 2015-05-18 19:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On 5/18/2015 12:38 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> Lorenzo/Bjorn,
>> >
>> >I have tested this patch on top of Jayachandran's V2 patch series
>> >(http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg40811.html) on AMD Seattle
>> >(w/ PROBE_ONLY and non-PROBE_ONLY mode), and your changes here works
>> >with additional changes below.
>> >
>> >It seems that when booting w/ PROBE_ONLY case, we need to call
>> >pci_read_bridge_bases() at some point before claiming the resources of
>> >devices underneath the bridge. This is needed to determine the bridge
>> >bases (i.e. bridge io, mmio and mmio_pref bases), and update bridge
>> >resources accordingly.
> Thanks for testing, I will give it a go on Seattle, if you can drop
> the log you get on PROBE_ONLY (without your patch below) that would be
> great so that I can have a look at the issue.
>
> Thanks,
> Lorenzo
>
Lorenzo,
Here is the log w/ PROBE_ONLY and w/o the changes I proposed:
# dmesg
.....
PCI host bridge /smb/pcie at f0000000 ranges:
IO 0xefff0000..0xefffffff -> 0x00000000
MEM 0x40000000..0xbfffffff -> 0x40000000
MEM 0x100000000..0x7fffffffff -> 0x100000000
pci-host-generic f0000000.pcie: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00
pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [bus 00-7f]
pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff]
pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x40000000-0xbfffffff]
pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0x100000000-0x7fffffffff]
pci 0000:00:00.0: of_irq_parse_pci() failed with rc=-19
pci 0000:00:02.0: of_irq_parse_pci() failed with rc=-19
pci 0000:01:00.0: can't claim BAR 0 [mem 0xbfe80000-0xbfefffff 64bit
pref]: no compatible bridge window
pci 0000:01:00.0: can't claim BAR 2 [io 0x0020-0x003f]: no compatible
bridge window
pci 0000:01:00.0: can't claim BAR 4 [mem 0xbff04000-0xbff07fff 64bit
pref]: no compatible bridge window
pci 0000:01:00.1: can't claim BAR 0 [mem 0xbfe00000-0xbfe7ffff 64bit
pref]: no compatible bridge window
pci 0000:01:00.1: can't claim BAR 2 [io 0x0000-0x001f]: no compatible
bridge window
pci 0000:01:00.1: can't claim BAR 4 [mem 0xbff00000-0xbff03fff 64bit
pref]: no compatible bridge window
.....
# dmesg | grep ixgbe
[ 7.189232] ixgbe: Intel(R) 10 Gigabit PCI Express Network Driver -
version 4.0.1-k
[ 7.195580] ixgbe: Copyright (c) 1999-2014 Intel Corporation.
[ 7.195638] ixgbe 0000:01:00.0: can't enable device: BAR 0 [mem size
0x00080000 64bit pref] not assigned
[ 7.195645] ixgbe: probe of 0000:01:00.0 failed with error -22
[ 7.195660] ixgbe 0000:01:00.1: can't enable device: BAR 0 [mem size
0x00080000 64bit pref] not assigned
[ 7.195664] ixgbe: probe of 0000:01:00.1 failed with error -22
Also, here is the bridge configuration. Please note that the change I
added tries to setup the bridge resource with information in
_Prefetchable memory behind_ region.
# lspci -vvv -s 0:2.1
00:02.1 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD] Device 1a02
(prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx-
Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort-
<TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
Latency: 0
Bus: primary=00, secondary=01, subordinate=01, sec-latency=0
I/O behind bridge: 00fff000-00000fff
Memory behind bridge: fff00000-000fffff
Prefetchable memory behind bridge:
00000000bfe00000-00000000bfffffff
Secondary status: 66MHz- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort-
<TAbort- <MAbort+ <SERR- <PERR-
BridgeCtl: Parity- SERR- NoISA- VGA- MAbort- >Reset- FastB2B-
PriDiscTmr- SecDiscTmr- DiscTmrStat- DiscTmrSERREn-
Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3
Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA
PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold+)
Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME-
Capabilities: [58] Express (v2) Root Port (Slot+), MSI 00
DevCap: MaxPayload 512 bytes, PhantFunc 0
ExtTag+ RBE+
DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal-
Unsupported-
RlxdOrd- ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+
MaxPayload 512 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes
DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq-
AuxPwr- TransPend-
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 5GT/s, Width x8, ASPM L0s L1,
Exit Latency L0s <512ns, L1 <64us
ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep+ BwNot-
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk+
ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
LnkSta: Speed 5GT/s, Width x4, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+
DLActive+ BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
SltCap: AttnBtn- PwrCtrl- MRL- AttnInd- PwrInd-
HotPlug- Surprise-
Slot #0, PowerLimit 0.000W; Interlock- NoCompl+
SltCtl: Enable: AttnBtn- PwrFlt- MRL- PresDet- CmdCplt-
HPIrq- LinkChg-
Control: AttnInd Unknown, PwrInd Unknown,
Power- Interlock-
SltSta: Status: AttnBtn- PowerFlt- MRL- CmdCplt-
PresDet+ Interlock-
Changed: MRL- PresDet- LinkState-
RootCtl: ErrCorrectable- ErrNon-Fatal- ErrFatal-
PMEIntEna- CRSVisible+
RootCap: CRSVisible-
RootSta: PME ReqID 0000, PMEStatus- PMEPending-
DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Range ABCD, TimeoutDis+,
LTR-, OBFF Not Supported ARIFwd+
DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis-,
LTR-, OBFF Disabled ARIFwd+
LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 5GT/s, EnterCompliance-
SpeedDis-
Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range,
EnterModifiedCompliance- ComplianceSOS-
Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB
LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB,
EqualizationComplete-, EqualizationPhase1-
EqualizationPhase2-, EqualizationPhase3-,
LinkEqualizationRequest-
Capabilities: [a0] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000
Capabilities: [c0] Subsystem: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
[AMD] Device 1234
Capabilities: [c8] HyperTransport: MSI Mapping Enable+ Fixed+
Capabilities: [100 v1] Vendor Specific Information: ID=0001
Rev=1 Len=010 <?>
Capabilities: [270 v1] #19
Thanks,
Suravee
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-14 14:42 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
@ 2015-05-19 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-20 9:16 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Helgaas @ 2015-05-19 23:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Lorenzo,
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:42:16PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
> should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
> them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
> checked.
>
> This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
> the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
> are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
> ARM64 systems.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Seems like Suravee proposed a tweak? Can you post a v2 with that
incorporated if necessary?
Bjorn
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
> */
> int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> + struct resource *res;
> + int i;
> +
> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>
> + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> + res = &dev->resource[i];
> + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> + continue;
> + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
> + }
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> --
> 2.2.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-18 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
@ 2015-05-20 8:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-20 13:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
1 sibling, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-20 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 03:09:03AM +0100, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
> On 5/14/2015 9:42 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
> > should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
> > them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
> > checked.
> >
> > This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
> > the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
> > are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
> > ARM64 systems.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
> > */
> > int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > {
> > + struct resource *res;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
> >
> > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> > + res = &dev->resource[i];
> > + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> > + continue;
> > + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
> > + }
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> >
>
> Lorenzo/Bjorn,
>
> I have tested this patch on top of Jayachandran's V2 patch series
> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg40811.html) on AMD Seattle
> (w/ PROBE_ONLY and non-PROBE_ONLY mode), and your changes here works
> with additional changes below.
>
> It seems that when booting w/ PROBE_ONLY case, we need to call
> pci_read_bridge_bases() at some point before claiming the resources of
> devices underneath the bridge. This is needed to determine the bridge
> bases (i.e. bridge io, mmio and mmio_pref bases), and update bridge
> resources accordingly.
>
> ---- BEGIN PATCH -----
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index c0a88ca..57be6aa 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>
> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>
> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
Does it really matter if PCI_PROBE_ONLY is set ?
> + !pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) &&
This check is useless, since pci_read_bridge_bases checks that already.
> + !pci_bridge_bases_is_read(dev->bus))
> + pci_read_bridge_bases(dev->bus);
> +
Ok. Most of the archs do that in pcibios_fixup_bus, I would like to
understand:
1) Should we do it on PCI_PROBE_ONLY only
2) Can we move this to generic code - ie pci_scan_child_bus (I guess answer
is no, because there are corner cases I am not aware of)
If I add it to arm64 (in pcibios_fixup_bus) I have to add it to arm too, more
arch specific code that has nothing arch specific in it so I am not really
keen on that.
Comments appreciated.
Lorenzo
> for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> res = &dev->resource[i];
> if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> index 6675a7a..6cab8be 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> @@ -447,6 +447,13 @@ static void pci_read_bridge_mmio_pref(struct
> pci_bus *child)
> }
> }
>
> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus)
> +{
> + return (bus->resource[0]->start ||
> + bus->resource[1]->start ||
> + bus->resource[2]->start);
> +}
> +
> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child)
> {
> struct pci_dev *dev = child->self;
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 353db8d..11c674d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -798,6 +798,7 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct
> pci_bus *bus);
> unsigned int pci_scan_child_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
> void pci_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev);
> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child);
> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus);
> struct resource *pci_find_parent_resource(const struct pci_dev *dev,
> struct resource *res);
> u8 pci_swizzle_interrupt_pin(const struct pci_dev *dev, u8 pin);
> ---- END PATCH -----
>
> I'm not sure if this is the best place to be reading the bridge bases.
> I guess we should be able to do this when adding bridge devices.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Suravee
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-19 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
@ 2015-05-20 9:16 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-20 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Bjorn,
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 12:25:31AM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Hi Lorenzo,
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 03:42:16PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
> > should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
> > them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
> > checked.
> >
> > This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
> > the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
> > are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
> > ARM64 systems.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>
> Seems like Suravee proposed a tweak? Can you post a v2 with that
> incorporated if necessary?
I can post a v2, but I am not happy about that tweak, I want to
understand why pci_read_bridge_bases has to be executed only on
PCI_PROBE_ONLY systems and why it can't be done in generic code in the
first place - ie pci_scan_child_bus(), I guess as I mentioned that in
some archs this can trigger regressions, if you have an opinion please
let me know, when we agree I will drop a v2 on the lists.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
> Bjorn
>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> > @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
> > */
> > int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > {
> > + struct resource *res;
> > + int i;
> > +
> > dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
> >
> > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> > + res = &dev->resource[i];
> > + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
> > + continue;
> > + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
> > + }
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.2.1
> >
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-20 8:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
@ 2015-05-20 13:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-20 17:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Bjorn Helgaas @ 2015-05-20 13:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 03:09:03AM +0100, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
>> On 5/14/2015 9:42 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> > When a device is scanned and added to the PCI bus, its resources
>> > should be claimed to validate the BARs configuration and to assign
>> > them a parent resource so that the resource hierarchy can be sanity
>> > checked.
>> >
>> > This patch adds code that carries out PCI device resources claiming to
>> > the ARM64 pcibios_add_device implementation so that device resources
>> > are claimed by the core PCI layer upon PCI device initialization on
>> > ARM64 systems.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
>> > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> > Cc: Liviu Dudau <liviu.dudau@arm.com>
>> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>> > ---
>> > arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> > index 4095379..c0a88ca 100644
>> > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> > @@ -43,8 +43,18 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void *data, const struct resource *res,
>> > */
>> > int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> > {
>> > + struct resource *res;
>> > + int i;
>> > +
>> > dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>> >
>> > + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
>> > + res = &dev->resource[i];
>> > + if (res->parent || !res->flags)
>> > + continue;
>> > + pci_claim_resource(dev, i);
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > return 0;
>> > }
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Lorenzo/Bjorn,
>>
>> I have tested this patch on top of Jayachandran's V2 patch series
>> (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg40811.html) on AMD Seattle
>> (w/ PROBE_ONLY and non-PROBE_ONLY mode), and your changes here works
>> with additional changes below.
>>
>> It seems that when booting w/ PROBE_ONLY case, we need to call
>> pci_read_bridge_bases() at some point before claiming the resources of
>> devices underneath the bridge. This is needed to determine the bridge
>> bases (i.e. bridge io, mmio and mmio_pref bases), and update bridge
>> resources accordingly.
>>
>> ---- BEGIN PATCH -----
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> index c0a88ca..57be6aa 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>
>> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
>>
>> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
>
> Does it really matter if PCI_PROBE_ONLY is set ?
>
>> + !pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) &&
>
> This check is useless, since pci_read_bridge_bases checks that already.
>
>> + !pci_bridge_bases_is_read(dev->bus))
>> + pci_read_bridge_bases(dev->bus);
>> +
>
> Ok. Most of the archs do that in pcibios_fixup_bus, I would like to
> understand:
>
> 1) Should we do it on PCI_PROBE_ONLY only
> 2) Can we move this to generic code - ie pci_scan_child_bus (I guess answer
> is no, because there are corner cases I am not aware of)
In my opinion, we should call pci_read_bridge_bases() in all cases,
regardless of PCI_PROBE_ONLY. pci_read_bridge_bases() doesn't
*change* anything in the hardware; it only reads what's there. (It
should attempt writes to learn whether I/O and prefetchable memory
apertures are implemented, but those should be done as in
pci_bridge_check_ranges(), where the original value is restored.)
I also think this should be done in generic code, since there's
nothing architecture-specific about bridge operation.
I've been hoping to get rid of pcibios_fixup_bus() completely for
years, and doing pci_read_bridge_bases() in generic code would be a
big step.
No doubt there are corner cases we'll trip over, but I'm not aware of them yet.
> If I add it to arm64 (in pcibios_fixup_bus) I have to add it to arm too, more
> arch specific code that has nothing arch specific in it so I am not really
> keen on that.
>
> Comments appreciated.
>
> Lorenzo
>
>> for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
>> res = &dev->resource[i];
>> if (res->parent || !res->flags)
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> index 6675a7a..6cab8be 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> @@ -447,6 +447,13 @@ static void pci_read_bridge_mmio_pref(struct
>> pci_bus *child)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> +{
>> + return (bus->resource[0]->start ||
>> + bus->resource[1]->start ||
>> + bus->resource[2]->start);
>> +}
>> +
>> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child)
>> {
>> struct pci_dev *dev = child->self;
>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
>> index 353db8d..11c674d 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>> @@ -798,6 +798,7 @@ void pci_device_add(struct pci_dev *dev, struct
>> pci_bus *bus);
>> unsigned int pci_scan_child_bus(struct pci_bus *bus);
>> void pci_bus_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev);
>> void pci_read_bridge_bases(struct pci_bus *child);
>> +bool pci_bridge_bases_is_read(struct pci_bus *bus);
>> struct resource *pci_find_parent_resource(const struct pci_dev *dev,
>> struct resource *res);
>> u8 pci_swizzle_interrupt_pin(const struct pci_dev *dev, u8 pin);
>> ---- END PATCH -----
>>
>> I'm not sure if this is the best place to be reading the bridge bases.
>> I guess we should be able to do this when adding bridge devices.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Suravee
>>
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: implement PCI device resources claiming
2015-05-20 13:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
@ 2015-05-20 17:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi @ 2015-05-20 17:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 02:02:52PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
[...]
> >> @@ -48,6 +48,11 @@ int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >>
> >> dev->irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci(dev, 0, 0);
> >>
> >> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
> >
> > Does it really matter if PCI_PROBE_ONLY is set ?
> >
> >> + !pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) &&
> >
> > This check is useless, since pci_read_bridge_bases checks that already.
> >
> >> + !pci_bridge_bases_is_read(dev->bus))
> >> + pci_read_bridge_bases(dev->bus);
> >> +
> >
> > Ok. Most of the archs do that in pcibios_fixup_bus, I would like to
> > understand:
> >
> > 1) Should we do it on PCI_PROBE_ONLY only
> > 2) Can we move this to generic code - ie pci_scan_child_bus (I guess answer
> > is no, because there are corner cases I am not aware of)
>
> In my opinion, we should call pci_read_bridge_bases() in all cases,
> regardless of PCI_PROBE_ONLY. pci_read_bridge_bases() doesn't
> *change* anything in the hardware; it only reads what's there. (It
> should attempt writes to learn whether I/O and prefetchable memory
> apertures are implemented, but those should be done as in
> pci_bridge_check_ranges(), where the original value is restored.)
>
> I also think this should be done in generic code, since there's
> nothing architecture-specific about bridge operation.
>
> I've been hoping to get rid of pcibios_fixup_bus() completely for
> years, and doing pci_read_bridge_bases() in generic code would be a
> big step.
I put together a patch to move it to pci_scan_child_bus, and to
remove it from almost all archs pcibios_fixup_bus implementations,
let's see how it goes.
> No doubt there are corner cases we'll trip over, but I'm not aware of them yet.
>
Let's find out :), posting tomorrow.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-05-20 17:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-05-14 14:42 [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/2] ARM: kernel: bios32: implement PCI device resources claiming Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-14 14:42 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/2] ARM64: kernel: pci: " Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-15 2:09 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-18 17:38 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-18 19:44 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-20 8:56 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-20 13:02 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-20 17:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-19 23:25 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-20 9:16 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).