From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
To: Suravee Suthikulanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Jayachandran C <jchandra@broadcom.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci
Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 08:34:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150512133431.GA2898@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <554ADCE0.8020603@amd.com>
On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 10:32:48PM -0500, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
> ...
> I tested this patch series on the AMD Seattle w/o PCI_PROBE_ONLY
> mode and that works fine. However, w/ PCI_PROBE_ONLY, I also run
> into the resource not claimed issue (no surprise here).
>
> So, I tried porting the pcibios_claim_one_bus() from
> arch/alpha/kernel/pci.c as Lorenzo suggested, plus the a small
> change in pci_claim_resource(), and it seems to work w/
> PCI_PROBE_ONLY. (Please see example patch below.)
>
> The additional while loop is needed in the pci_claim_resource()
> since I need to reference back to the resource in the root bus,
> which are defined from the DT node. Does this sounds like a
> reasonable approach?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c
> b/drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c
> index e9cc559..0dfa23d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c
> @@ -261,7 +261,10 @@ static int gen_pci_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (!pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY)) {
> pci_bus_size_bridges(bus);
> pci_bus_assign_resources(bus);
> + } else {
> + pci_claim_one_bus(bus);
> }
> +
> pci_bus_add_devices(bus);
>
> /* Configure PCI Express settings */
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> index 232f925..d4b43b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@ int pci_claim_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, int
> resource)
> {
> struct resource *res = &dev->resource[resource];
> struct resource *root, *conflict;
> + struct pci_dev *pdev = dev;
>
> if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_UNSET) {
> dev_info(&dev->dev, "can't claim BAR %d %pR: no address assigned\n",
> @@ -116,7 +117,18 @@ int pci_claim_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, int
> resource)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - root = pci_find_parent_resource(dev, res);
> + while (pdev) {
> + root = pci_find_parent_resource(pdev, res);
> + if (root)
> + break;
> +
> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) &&
> + !pci_is_root_bus(pdev->bus))
> + pdev = pdev->bus->self;
> + else
> + break;
> + }
I don't understand this new loop. Apparently you have a device BAR, and
the upstream bridge doesn't have a window that contains the BAR? That
sounds like a problem with the upstream bridge resources.
Do you have an example that would make this more concrete, e.g., a host
bridge, P2P bridge(s), and endpoint with their resources?
> +
> if (!root) {
> dev_info(&dev->dev, "can't claim BAR %d %pR: no compatible bridge
> window\n",
> resource, res);
> @@ -136,6 +148,36 @@ int pci_claim_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, int
> resource)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_claim_resource);
>
> +void pci_claim_one_bus(struct pci_bus *b)
> +{
> + struct pci_dev *pdev;
> + struct pci_bus *child_bus;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(pdev, &b->devices, bus_list) {
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> + struct resource *r = &pdev->resource[i];
> +
> + if (r->parent || !r->start || !r->flags)
> + continue;
> +
> + if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY) ||
> + (r->flags & IORESOURCE_PCI_FIXED)) {
> + if (pci_claim_resource(pdev, i) == 0)
> + continue;
> +
> + pci_claim_bridge_resource(pdev, i);
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(child_bus, &b->children, node) {
> + pci_claim_one_bus(child_bus);
> + }
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_claim_one_bus);
I'm not a fan of pci_claim_one_bus(), on the philosophical grounds that
claiming resources is a per-device thing, and I don't want to encourage
people to do it on a per-bus level.
I'd rather claim them somewhere in the pci_device_add() path, as s390 does
in pcibios_add_device(). In fact, I'd *like* to do it even earlier, when
we read each BAR, so we could identify invalid or unassigned BARs
immediately.
> +
> void pci_disable_bridge_window(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> dev_info(&dev->dev, "disabling bridge mem windows\n");
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 353db8d..b59ad4b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -1085,6 +1085,7 @@ void
> pci_assign_unassigned_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *bridge);
> void pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources(struct pci_bus *bus);
> void pci_assign_unassigned_root_bus_resources(struct pci_bus *bus);
> void pdev_enable_device(struct pci_dev *);
> +void pci_claim_one_bus(struct pci_bus *b);
> int pci_enable_resources(struct pci_dev *, int mask);
> void pci_fixup_irqs(u8 (*)(struct pci_dev *, u8 *),
> int (*)(const struct pci_dev *, u8, u8));
> -------- END PATCH ----
>
> Thanks,
>
> Suravee
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-12 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-05 2:02 [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci Jayachandran C
2015-05-05 2:02 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] PCI: generic: add arm64 support Jayachandran C
2015-05-05 15:53 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI: generic: remove dependency on hw_pci Will Deacon
2015-05-05 15:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-05 16:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-06 14:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-06 15:18 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-07 3:32 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-12 13:34 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2015-05-12 16:34 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2015-05-12 19:20 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-13 12:47 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-13 13:54 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-13 15:05 ` Suravee Suthikulanit
2015-05-13 15:11 ` Bjorn Helgaas
[not found] ` <20150512000746.GA31418@jayachandranc.netlogicmicro.com>
2015-05-19 23:09 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-20 17:29 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-20 20:46 ` Bjorn Helgaas
[not found] ` <20150521063729.GB31418@jayachandranc.netlogicmicro.com>
2015-05-26 9:59 ` Will Deacon
2015-05-26 10:38 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=20150512133431.GA2898@google.com \
--to=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=jchandra@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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 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).