From: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Refresh offset/stride after NumVFs is written
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:11:14 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141125091114.GA314@richard> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20141125034651.GA5646@shangw>
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 02:46:52PM +1100, Gavin Shan wrote:
>On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 11:14:55AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>>On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:01:08AM +1100, Gavin Shan wrote:
>>>On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 10:52:39AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>>>>According to SR-IOV spec sec 3.3.9, 3.3.10, the NumVFs setting change will
>>>>affect the offset and stride. Current implementation doesn't refresh the
>>>>offset/stride cached in pci_sriov structure.
>>>>
>>>>This patch introduces a wrapper pci_iov_set_numvfs(), which refresh these two
>>>>value after NumVFs is written.
>>>>
>>>>Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>---
>>>> drivers/pci/iov.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>>diff --git a/drivers/pci/iov.c b/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>>>index 4d109c0..c7010c5 100644
>>>>--- a/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>>>+++ b/drivers/pci/iov.c
>>>>@@ -31,6 +31,15 @@ static inline u8 virtfn_devfn(struct pci_dev *dev, int id)
>>>> dev->sriov->stride * id) & 0xff;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>+static inline void pci_iov_set_numvfs(struct pci_dev *dev, int nr_virtfn)
>>>>+{
>>>>+ struct pci_sriov *iov = dev->sriov;
>>>>+
>>>>+ pci_write_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_NUM_VF, nr_virtfn);
>>>
>>>I'm suspecting writing to PCI_SRIOV_NUM_VF would take some time to take
>>>effect.
>>>
>>>>+ pci_read_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_VF_OFFSET, &iov->offset);
>>>>+ pci_read_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_VF_STRIDE, &iov->stride);
>>>>+}
>>>>+
>>>> static struct pci_bus *virtfn_add_bus(struct pci_bus *bus, int busnr)
>>>> {
>>>> struct pci_bus *child;
>>>>@@ -243,7 +252,7 @@ static int sriov_enable(struct pci_dev *dev, int nr_virtfn)
>>>> return rc;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>- pci_write_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_NUM_VF, nr_virtfn);
>>>>+ pci_iov_set_numvfs(dev, nr_virtfn);
>>>> iov->ctrl |= PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VFE | PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_MSE;
>>>> pci_cfg_access_lock(dev);
>>>> pci_write_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_CTRL, iov->ctrl);
>>>>@@ -272,7 +281,7 @@ failed:
>>>> iov->ctrl &= ~(PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_VFE | PCI_SRIOV_CTRL_MSE);
>>>> pci_cfg_access_lock(dev);
>>>> pci_write_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_CTRL, iov->ctrl);
>>>>- pci_write_config_word(dev, iov->pos + PCI_SRIOV_NUM_VF, 0);
>>>>+ pci_iov_set_numvfs(dev, 0);
>>>> ssleep(1);
>>>
>>>The 1 second delay here might be for waiting VFs to be ready.
>>>
>>
>>Hmm... so add this ssleep() in pci_iov_set_numvfs() would be better?
>>
>
>I was not suggesting to do that. I just raised the concern for you
>to look into.
>
I looked in the SPEC sec 3.3.3.1 VF Enable. In this section, it says this:
To allow components to perform internal initialization, system software must wait for at least
100 ms after changing the VF Enable bit from a 0 to a 1, before it is permitted to issue Requests to
the VFs which are enabled by that VF Enable bit. The Root Complex and/or system software must
allow at least 1.0 s after Setting the VF Enable bit, before it may determine that a VF which fails to
return a Successful Completion status for a valid Configuration Request is broken. After Setting the
VF Enable bit, the VFs enabled by that VF Enable bit are permitted to return a CRS status to
configuration requests up to the 1.0 s limit, if they are not ready to provide a Successful Completion
status for a valid Configuration Request. Additionally, a VF is not permitted to return CRS after
having previously returned a Successful Completion without an intervening VF disable or other valid
reset condition.
As my understanding, it will take 1ms or 1s after VF Enable bit is set.
Actually I am confused with the two different time, in which case we needs to
wait for different time? And some place we add a lock, but no lock in others.
While from the SPEC, I don't see some description the NumVFs field will take
some time to be effective.
--
Richard Yang
Help you, Help me
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-25 9:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-22 2:52 [PATCH] PCI: Refresh offset/stride after NumVFs is written Wei Yang
2014-11-24 23:01 ` Gavin Shan
2014-11-25 3:14 ` Wei Yang
2014-11-25 3:46 ` Gavin Shan
2014-11-25 9:11 ` Wei Yang [this message]
2014-11-25 23:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-11-26 3:50 ` Wei Yang
2014-11-26 8:14 ` Wei Yang
2014-11-26 8:40 ` Wei Yang
2014-12-04 1:26 ` Wei Yang
2014-12-09 10:35 ` Wei Yang
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=20141125091114.GA314@richard \
--to=weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.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 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).