From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D9414A01; Thu, 2 Oct 2025 14:54:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759416861; cv=none; b=jKLVN//BJk9KTCnuNXF3EXFMIJ6U47i/b6pVXMohA+G9f8RUU44kf2fxwwD1W8pDQM3OYBbqzSYv/8F6P4XtHbohvCZ6LJ+NOdet4W67lwq1HK3rQiJgy8a3l/x+t6SdNdSFD3mPbxPLIV4MgXMGvgrwKlCjgI035sfniUf4GKQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759416861; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6rLn1aZBCCQeZO05QrGDkxTGMMTUPAhFYfX7Y5GteVo=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VhoOCNMr0OC0AgtAKgZrvX4U5rHWTIbKv+98InjNTBAW4TjhLyA0zEMnkTNDU89Gg31mS26gDBEqxi6irgYepf7kks64o9LrSxM5Fich6OAd+4dLE7dj9/8YYlYGKksDTGk6InDypIjrTSoxHVqrnTtETog2NEuHNfnlECGz0nA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=Jx9Aa44+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="Jx9Aa44+" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1759416859; x=1790952859; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=6rLn1aZBCCQeZO05QrGDkxTGMMTUPAhFYfX7Y5GteVo=; b=Jx9Aa44+E66BHeDuyyMziPZphg77OQ0dJBMDDcrs9ap7Y1lYjdrx0BDa Iex13wFKK2h9qvv64B/O2lQdC17mF665FhpZGi+kkTMSgDenG1NNLlfD7 x/c101NWXBbRVi8CfNSJwRr4Xo6AP//K2Q9bvA03h9rAfV3kh8sRTLEDE RljfPz7gDYz52Pca15rnJwwLO7skvYh8adroR3irNBCESyaZyzax5hwaJ V5Cc6nhKJK2uk6zBHdSbCrQB03vmeOLezSMslzgQGvZ4Zp6MdrcoN2haD 0m+Snrabg4nsyDOxQ2yTWFOgoZrx31D8mDj1LHKDP/BWW+31QJjHQrgAy Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: g6wlG2F+Q1iJ6JwEuLm8Tw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: zyBpOlIRRfOXovkAisCtNg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11570"; a="60740067" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.18,309,1751266800"; d="scan'208";a="60740067" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by fmvoesa113.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Oct 2025 07:54:17 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: qkx929+7RY64TKgRJ4EUgw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: HOrkj3FtSDqSRQbl6gabuA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.18,309,1751266800"; d="scan'208";a="178332386" Received: from ijarvine-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.245.246]) by orviesa010-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Oct 2025 07:54:14 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 17:54:10 +0300 (EEST) To: Geert Uytterhoeven cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=F1ski?= , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , LKML , Lucas De Marchi , Linux-Renesas Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: Resources outside their window must set IORESOURCE_UNSET In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2d5e9b78-8a90-3035-ff42-e881d61f4b7c@linux.intel.com> References: <20250924134228.1663-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20250924134228.1663-3-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <4c28cd58-fd0d-1dff-ad31-df3c488c464f@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-1265333908-1759416850=:947" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1265333908-1759416850=:947 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE On Wed, 1 Oct 2025, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Wed, 1 Oct 2025 at 15:06, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen > wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Oct 2025, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Sept 2025 at 18:32, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen > > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 30 Sep 2025, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 26 Sept 2025 at 04:40, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > PNP resources are checked for conflicts with the other resource= in the > > > > > > system by quirk_system_pci_resources() that walks through all P= CI > > > > > > resources. quirk_system_pci_resources() correctly filters out r= esource > > > > > > with IORESOURCE_UNSET. > > > > > > > > > > > > Resources that do not reside within their bridge window, howeve= r, are > > > > > > not properly initialized with IORESOURCE_UNSET resulting in bog= us > > > > > > conflicts detected in quirk_system_pci_resources(): > > > > > > > > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: VF BAR 2 [mem 0x00000000-0x1fffffff 64bit pre= f] > > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: VF BAR 2 [mem 0x00000000-0xdfffffff 64bit pre= f]: contains BAR 2 for 7 VFs > > > > > > ... > > > > > > pci 0000:03:00.0: VF BAR 2 [mem 0x00000000-0x1ffffffff 64bit pr= ef] > > > > > > pci 0000:03:00.0: VF BAR 2 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit p= ref]: contains BAR 2 for 31 VFs > > > > > > ... > > > > > > pnp 00:04: disabling [mem 0xfc000000-0xfc00ffff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xc0000000-0xcfffffff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:00:02.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0xdfffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfedc0000-0xfedc7fff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfeda0000-0xfeda0fff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfeda1000-0xfeda1fff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xc0000000-0xcfffffff disabled] becau= se it overlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfed20000-0xfed7ffff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfed90000-0xfed93fff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfed45000-0xfed8ffff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > pnp 00:05: disabling [mem 0xfee00000-0xfeefffff] because it ove= rlaps 0000:03:00.0 BAR 9 [mem 0x00000000-0x3dffffffff 64bit pref] > > > > > > > > > > > > Mark resources that are not contained within their bridge windo= w with > > > > > > IORESOURCE_UNSET in __pci_read_base() which resolves the false > > > > > > positives for the overlap check in quirk_system_pci_resources()= =2E > > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: f7834c092c42 ("PNP: Don't check for overlaps with unassi= gned PCI BARs") > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your patch, which is now commit 06b77d5647a4d6a7 ("PCI= : > > > > > Mark resources IORESOURCE_UNSET when outside bridge windows") in > > > > > linux-next/master next-20250929 pci/next > > > > > > > > This replaces the actual resources by their sizes in the boot log= on > > > > > e.g. on R-Car M2-W: > > > > > > > > > > pci-rcar-gen2 ee090000.pci: host bridge /soc/pci@ee090000 ra= nges: > > > > > pci-rcar-gen2 ee090000.pci: MEM 0x00ee080000..0x00ee08f= fff -> 0x00ee080000 > > > > > pci-rcar-gen2 ee090000.pci: PCI: revision 11 > > > > > pci-rcar-gen2 ee090000.pci: PCI host bridge to bus 0000:00 > > > > > pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [bus 00] > > > > > pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0xee080000-0xee08fff= f] > > > > > pci 0000:00:00.0: [1033:0000] type 00 class 0x060000 convent= ional PCI endpoint > > > > > -pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 0 [mem 0xee090800-0xee090bff] > > > > > -pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 1 [mem 0x40000000-0x7fffffff pref] > > > > > > > > What is going to be the parent of these resources? They don't seem = to fall > > > > under the root bus resource above in which case the output change i= s > > > > intentional so they don't appear as if address range would be "okay= ". > > > > > > >From /proc/iomem: > > > > > > ee080000-ee08ffff : pci@ee090000 > > > ee080000-ee080fff : 0000:00:01.0 > > > ee080000-ee080fff : ohci_hcd > > > ee081000-ee0810ff : 0000:00:02.0 > > > ee081000-ee0810ff : ehci_hcd > > > ee090000-ee090bff : ee090000.pci pci@ee090000 > > > > Okay, so this seem to appear in the resource tree but not among the roo= t > > bus resources. > > > > > ee0c0000-ee0cffff : pci@ee0d0000 > > > ee0c0000-ee0c0fff : 0001:01:01.0 > > > ee0c0000-ee0c0fff : ohci_hcd > > > ee0c1000-ee0c10ff : 0001:01:02.0 > > > ee0c1000-ee0c10ff : ehci_hcd > > > > > > > When IORESOURCE_UNSET is set in a resource, %pR does not print the = start > > > > and end addresses. > > > > > > Yeah, that's how I found this commit, without bisecting ;-) > > > > > > > > +pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 0 [mem size 0x00000400] > > > > > +pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 1 [mem size 0x40000000 pref] > > > > > pci 0000:00:01.0: [1033:0035] type 00 class 0x0c0310 convent= ional PCI endpoint > > > > > -pci 0000:00:01.0: BAR 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x00000fff] > > > > > +pci 0000:00:01.0: BAR 0 [mem size 0x00001000] > > > > > > > > For this resource, it's very much intentional. It's a zero-based BA= R which > > > > was left without IORESOURCE_UNSET prior to my patch leading to othe= rs part > > > > of the kernel to think that resource range valid and in use (in you= r > > > > case it's so small it wouldn't collide with anything but it wasn't > > > > properly set up resource, nonetheless). > > > > > > > > > pci 0000:00:01.0: supports D1 D2 > > > > > pci 0000:00:01.0: PME# supported from D0 D1 D2 D3hot > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: [1033:00e0] type 00 class 0x0c0320 convent= ional PCI endpoint > > > > > -pci 0000:00:02.0: BAR 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x000000ff] > > > > > +pci 0000:00:02.0: BAR 0 [mem size 0x00000100] > > > > > > > > And this as well is very much intentional. > > > > > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: supports D1 D2 > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: PME# supported from D0 D1 D2 D3hot > > > > > PCI: bus0: Fast back to back transfers disabled > > > > > pci 0000:00:01.0: BAR 0 [mem 0xee080000-0xee080fff]: assigne= d > > > > > pci 0000:00:02.0: BAR 0 [mem 0xee081000-0xee0810ff]: assigne= d > > > > > pci_bus 0000:00: resource 4 [mem 0xee080000-0xee08ffff] > > > > > > > > > > Is that intentional? > > > > > > > > There's also that pci_dbg() in the patch which would show the origi= nal > > > > addresses (print the resource before setting IORESOURCE_UNSET) but = to see > > > > it one would need to enable it with dyndbg=3D... Bjorn was thinking= of > > > > making that pci_info() though so it would appear always. > > > > > > > > Was this the entire PCI related diff? I don't see those 0000:00:00.= 0 BARs > > > > getting assigned anywhere. > > > > > > The above log is almost complete (lacked enabling the device afterwar= ds). > > > > > > AFAIU, the BARs come from the reg and ranges properties in the > > > PCI controller nodes; > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.17/source/arch/arm/boot/dts/renes= as/r8a7791.dtsi#L1562 > > > > Thanks, although I had already found this line by grep. I was just > > expecting the address appear among root bus resources too. > > > > Curiously enough, pci_register_host_bridge() seems to try to add some > > resource from that list into bus and it's what prints those "root bus > > resource" lines and ee090000 is not among the printed lines despite > > appearing in /proc/iomem. As is, the resource tree and PCI bus view on = the > > resources seems to be in disagreement and I'm not sure what to make of = it. > > > > But before considering going into that direction or figuring out why th= is > > ee090000 resource does not appear among root bus resources, could you > > check if the attached patch changes behavior for the resource which are > > non-zero based? >=20 > This patch has no impact on dmesg, lspci output, or /proc/iomem > for pci-rcar-gen2. It would have been too easy... :-( I'm sorry I don't really know these platform well and I'm currently trying= =20 to understand what adds that ee090000 resource into the resource tree and so far I've not been very successful. Perhaps it would be easiest to print a stacktrace when the resource is=20 added but there are many possible functions. I think all of them=20 converge in __request_resource() so I suggest adding: WARN_ON(new->start =3D=3D 0xee090000); before __request_resource() does anything. --=20 i. --8323328-1265333908-1759416850=:947--