public inbox for linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Sizhe Liu <liusizhe5@huawei.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com,
	shiju.jose@huawei.com,  linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxarm@huawei.com, prime.zeng@hisilicon.com,
	 fanghao11@huawei.com, shenyang39@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Fix PCI bridge resource allocation when base exceeds limit
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 19:21:38 +0200 (EET)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d9228d6-a230-6ddf-e300-fbf42d523863@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc4121b7-b99e-d7e0-8c20-8a2f0d3a0e2d@linux.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4944 bytes --]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2026, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Feb 2026, Sizhe Liu wrote:
> 
> > In pci_read_bridge_mmio_pref(), pci_read_bridge_mmio() and pci_read_bridge_io(),
> > when the MEMORY_BASE value is greater than MEMORY_LIMIT,
> > resource_set_range(res, 0, 0) is called to set both the start address
> > and the size of the address of the PCI bridge resource to 0.
> > However, the end address is later calculated as:
> > res->end = res->start + size - 1
> > As a result, the resource range becomes [0x00000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
> > instead of the expected [0x00000000-0x00000000].
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for the patch but your understanding on how resources addresses 
> work is not correct.
> 
> A zero sized resource should have end at start - 1, just like 
> resource_set_range() sets it!
> 
> > This causes an exception in the subsequent resource claiming process,
> > because the address range [0x00000000-0xffffffffffffffff] exceeds
> > the range specified in the DSDT. The abnormal bridge triggers clipping
> > when claiming resources, then the entire parent PCI bus address range
> > becomes occupied. Other bridges on the same bus will report
> > address conflicts during their claim process. The resource allocation
> > may be degraded from 64-bit to 32-bit, or even worse, it fails.
> > 
> > The related boot log is as follows:
> > pci 0000:20:00.0: PCI bridge to [bus 21]
> > pci 0000:20:00.0: bridge window [io  size 0x0000 disabled]: can't claim; no address assigned
> > pci 0000:20:00.0: [io  0x0000-0xffffffffffffffff disabled] clipped to [io  0x0000-0xffff disabled]
> 
> pci_bus_clip_resource() should not touch IORESOURCE_DISABLED resources 
> nor zero sized resources. The problem seems to originate from 
> pci_claim_bridge_resources() and pci_claim_bridge_resource() which try to 
> claim such resources no matter what.
> 
> I think pci_claim_bridge_resources() should check if IORESOURCE_DISABLED 
> is set and use continue, it already has check !r->flags which probably 
> worked prior to 8278c6914306 ("PCI: Preserve bridge window resource type 
> flags") but is no longer enough to decided if bridge window is valid or 
> not.
> 
> Do you want to do that patch and test it? (I'm quite busy this week 
> myself.)

I managed to get the patch done:

--
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 19:14:30 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] PCI: Don't claim disabled bridge windows
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

The commit 8278c6914306 ("PCI: Preserve bridge window resource type
flags") change bridge window resource behavior such that flags are no
longer zero if the bridge window is not valid or is disabled (mainly
to preserve the type flags for later use). If a bridge window has its
limit smaller than base address, pci_read_bridge_*() sets both
IORESOURCE_UNSET and IORESOURCE_DISABLED to indicate the bridge window
exists but is not valid with the current base and limit configuration.

The code in pci_claim_bridge_resources() still depends on the old
behavior be checking validity of the bridge window solely based on
!r->flags, whereas after the commit 8278c6914306 ("PCI: Preserve bridge
window resource type flags"), also IORESOURCE_DISABLED may indicate
bridge window addresses are not valid.

While pci_claim_resource() does check IORESOURCE_UNSET,
pci_claim_bridge_resource() does attempt to clip the resource if
pci_claim_resource() fails which is not correct for not valid bridge
window resource. As pci_bus_clip_resource() performs clipping
regardless flags and then clears IORESOURCE_UNSET, it should not be
called for not valid resources.

The problem is visible in this log:

pci 0000:20:00.0: PCI bridge to [bus 21]
pci 0000:20:00.0: bridge window [io  size 0x0000 disabled]: can't claim; no address assigned
pci 0000:20:00.0: [io  0x0000-0xffffffffffffffff disabled] clipped to [io 0x0000-0xffff disabled]

Add IORESOURCE_DISABLED check into pci_claim_bridge_resources() to
only claim bridge windows that appear to have a valid configuration.

Reported-by: Sizhe Liu <liusizhe5@huawei.com>
Fixes: 8278c6914306 ("PCI: Preserve bridge window resource type flags")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
---
 drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
index 6e90f46f52af..43ea635e1ea8 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
@@ -1733,6 +1733,8 @@ static void pci_claim_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *dev)
 
 		if (!r->flags || r->parent)
 			continue;
+		if (r->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED)
+			continue;
 
 		pci_claim_bridge_resource(dev, i);
 	}

base-commit: 8f0b4cce4481fb22653697cced8d0d04027cb1e8
-- 
2.39.5

  reply	other threads:[~2026-02-03 17:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-03  2:35 [PATCH] PCI: Fix PCI bridge resource allocation when base exceeds limit Sizhe Liu
2026-02-03 15:14 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-02-03 17:21   ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2026-02-04  8:56     ` Sizhe LIU
2026-02-06 22:17     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-02-04  3:58   ` Sizhe LIU

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=4d9228d6-a230-6ddf-e300-fbf42d523863@linux.intel.com \
    --to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=fanghao11@huawei.com \
    --cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=liusizhe5@huawei.com \
    --cc=prime.zeng@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=shenyang39@huawei.com \
    --cc=shiju.jose@huawei.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