From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Sangwoo Han <sangwoo.han@nearthlab.com>
Cc: jim2101024@gmail.com, florian.fainelli@broadcom.com,
lpieralisi@kernel.org, kwilczynski@kernel.org, mani@kernel.org,
bhelgaas@google.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
robh@kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: brcmstb: Reserve only the MSI vectors that are handed out
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 17:22:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260803222210.GA1804081@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260730072215.2090974-1-sangwoo.han@nearthlab.com>
On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 04:22:15PM +0900, Sangwoo Han wrote:
> brcm_msi_alloc() reserves a naturally aligned power-of-two region with
> bitmap_find_free_region(order_base_2(nr_irqs)), but the irqdomain core
> releases the vectors of a block one at a time:
>
> /* irq_domain_free_irqs_hierarchy() */
> for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
> if (irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, irq_base + i))
> domain->ops->free(domain, irq_base + i, 1);
>
> That loop is the only caller of an irq_domain's ops->free(), so
> brcm_irq_domain_free() always sees nr_irqs == 1 and
> bitmap_release_region() clears exactly one bit per call. A request whose
> vector count is not a power of two therefore reserves
> roundup_pow_of_two(nr_irqs) bits but releases only nr_irqs of them, and
> the difference stays set for the lifetime of the controller.
>
> Multi-MSI regions are order-aligned and the controller has at most 32
> MSIs, so the pool is quickly exhausted. Observed on a BCM2712 with a
> 5-vector endpoint behind a 4-port PCIe switch: the switch ports take
> hwirq 0x0-0x3 and the endpoint's block walks 0x8 -> 0x10 -> 0x18 across
> three driver reloads until no aligned order-3 region is left.
> pci_alloc_irq_vectors() then falls back to a single vector for the rest
> of the boot, silently multiplexing the endpoint's four completion
> interrupts onto one hwirq.
>
> Devices that ask for a non-power-of-two vector count are not exotic:
> wil6210 asks for 3, the MHI modems for 5 (Quectel EM1xx, Foxconn SDX55,
> Telit FN990, MediaTek MV3x) or 7 (Qualcomm v1), ath11k WCN6750 for 28
> and ptp_ocp for 17. MSI-X is unaffected because it allocates one
> descriptor per vector with nvec_used == 1, so the order is always zero.
>
> Reserve exactly the vectors that are handed out, at a base found with
> bitmap_find_next_zero_area(), and clear exactly the vectors that are
> freed. The number of reserved bits then matches the number the core
> releases, whatever arity it uses.
>
> The base still has to be aligned: PCI Local Bus Specification 3.0
> (section 6.8.1.6) lets the endpoint encode the vector number in the low
> order_base_2(nr_irqs) bits of the Message Data register, and in this
> controller those bits are the hwirq itself. The alignment mask has to be
> roundup_pow_of_two(nr_irqs) - 1 rather than nr_irqs - 1:
> bitmap_find_next_zero_area() requires a mask of the form 2^k - 1. No
> align_offset is needed because the bitmap index is the value the
> endpoint ORs in, see brcm_msi_compose_msi_msg().
>
> For a power-of-two nr_irqs the alignment and the region length are both
> nr_irqs, so the base returned is the same as before and those
> allocations are unaffected.
Several other PCI controller drivers have similar code.
I think we should fix them all at once (or explain why they don't need
similar fixes). Might be worth a little helper so they all work the
same way (e.g., some use order_base_2(), others use get_count_order(),
which seems like a pointless difference).
> Fixes: 198acab1772f ("PCI: brcmstb: Enable Multi-MSI")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Sangwoo Han <sangwoo.han@nearthlab.com>
> ---
>
> Notes:
> Tested on a BCM2712 (Raspberry Pi 5) with a 5-vector endpoint behind a
> 4-port PCIe switch, running 6.12.25 where brcm_msi_alloc() and
> brcm_msi_free() are byte-identical to mainline. Without the patch the
> endpoint's block walks 0x8 -> 0x10 -> 0x18 over three driver reloads and
> then falls back to a single vector for the rest of the boot; with it the
> block returns to 0x8 on all of eight reload cycles and the inner
> domain's mapped count round-trips cleanly.
>
> Compile-tested on mainline for arm64 with W=1 and C=1 (sparse); no new
> warnings.
>
> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> index 8a0c353d2a..6c5166666d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
> @@ -595,11 +595,22 @@ static struct irq_chip brcm_msi_bottom_irq_chip = {
>
> static int brcm_msi_alloc(struct brcm_msi *msi, unsigned int nr_irqs)
> {
> + /*
> + * brcm_msi_compose_msi_msg() puts hwirq in the low order bits of the
> + * message data, which a Multi-MSI endpoint rewrites per vector, so a
> + * block's base must be aligned to the Multiple Message Enable count.
> + */
> + unsigned long align_mask = roundup_pow_of_two(nr_irqs) - 1;
> int hwirq;
>
> mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> - hwirq = bitmap_find_free_region(msi->used, msi->nr,
> - order_base_2(nr_irqs));
> + hwirq = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(msi->used, msi->nr, 0, nr_irqs,
> + align_mask);
> + if (hwirq >= msi->nr) {
> + mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> + return -ENOSPC;
> + }
> + bitmap_set(msi->used, hwirq, nr_irqs);
> mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
>
> return hwirq;
> @@ -609,7 +620,7 @@ static void brcm_msi_free(struct brcm_msi *msi, unsigned long hwirq,
> unsigned int nr_irqs)
> {
> mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> - bitmap_release_region(msi->used, hwirq, order_base_2(nr_irqs));
> + bitmap_clear(msi->used, hwirq, nr_irqs);
> mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> }
>
> --
> 2.53.0
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-30 7:22 [PATCH] PCI: brcmstb: Reserve only the MSI vectors that are handed out Sangwoo Han
2026-07-30 7:46 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-30 8:18 ` Han / 한상우Sangwoo
2026-08-03 16:11 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-08-03 22:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
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=20260803222210.GA1804081@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=florian.fainelli@broadcom.com \
--cc=jim2101024@gmail.com \
--cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sangwoo.han@nearthlab.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