From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PCI resource allocation mismatch with BIOS
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 12:09:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4XaZPav0Dl/fA16@black.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221129064812.GA1555@wunner.de>
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 07:48:12AM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 03:06:17PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > Agreed. Is this convoluted removal process being used to force a SBR,
> > versus a FLR or PM reset that might otherwise be used by twiddling the
> > reset attribute of the GPU directly? If so, the reset_method attribute
> > can be used to force a bus reset and perform all the state save/restore
> > handling to avoid reallocating BARs. A reset from the upstream switch
> > port would only be necessary if you have some reason to also reset the
> > switch downstream ports. Thanks,
>
> A Secondary Bus Reset is only offered as a reset_method if the
> device to be reset is the *only* child of the upstream bridge.
> I.e. if the device to be reset has siblings or children,
> a Secondary Bus Reset is not permitted.
>
> Modern GPUs (including the one Mika is referring to) consist of
> a PCIe switch with the GPU, HD audio and telemetry devices below
> Downstream Bridges. A Secondary Bus Reset of the Root Port is
> not allowed in this case because the Switch Upstream Port has
> children.
>
> See this code in pci_parent_bus_reset():
>
> if (pci_is_root_bus(dev->bus) || dev->subordinate ||
> !dev->bus->self || dev->dev_flags & PCI_DEV_FLAGS_NO_BUS_RESET)
> return -ENOTTY;
>
> The dev->subordinate check disallows a SBR if there are children.
> Note that the code should probably instead check for...
> (dev->subordinate && !list_empty(dev->subordinate->devices))
> ...because the port may have a subordinate bus without children
> (may have been removed for example).
>
> The "no siblings" rule is enforced by:
>
> list_for_each_entry(pdev, &dev->bus->devices, bus_list)
> if (pdev != dev)
> return -ENOTTY;
>
> Note that the devices list is iterated without holding pci_bus_sem,
> which looks fishy.
>
> That said, it *is* possible that a Secondary Bus Reset is erroneously
> offered despite these checks because we perform them early on device
> enumeration when the subordinate bus hasn't been scanned yet.
Thanks Lukas for the good explanation :) I think because of the above
our GPU folks do Secondary Bus Reset directly by poking the config space
through setpci or so, and I guess this is why they need the "remove"
phase as well.
> So if the Root Port offers other reset methods besides SBR and the
> user switches to one of them, then reinstates the defaults,
> suddenly SBR will disappear because the subordinate bus has since
> been scanned. What's missing here is that we re-check availability
> of the reset methods on siblings and the parent when a device is
> added or removed. This is also necessary to make reset_method
> work properly with hotplug. However, the result may be that the
> reset_method attribute in sysfs may become invisible after adding
> a device (because there is no reset method available) and reappear
> after removing a device.
>
> So the reset_method logic is pretty broken right now I'm afraid.
>
> In any case, for Mika's use case it would be useful to have a
> "reset_subordinate" attribute on ports capable of a SBR such that
> the entire hierarchy below is reset. The "reset" attribute is
> insufficient.
Yes, that would be useful indeed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-29 10:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-28 11:14 PCI resource allocation mismatch with BIOS Mika Westerberg
2022-11-28 20:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2022-11-28 22:06 ` Alex Williamson
2022-11-29 6:48 ` Lukas Wunner
2022-11-29 10:09 ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2022-11-29 13:52 ` Alex Williamson
2022-11-29 15:07 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-11-29 15:46 ` Alex Williamson
2022-11-29 16:06 ` Lukas Wunner
2022-11-29 16:12 ` Alex Williamson
2022-11-30 7:43 ` Lukas Wunner
2022-11-30 7:57 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-11-30 15:47 ` Alex Williamson
2022-12-01 9:41 ` Mika Westerberg
2022-12-09 11:08 ` Mika Westerberg
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=Y4XaZPav0Dl/fA16@black.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
/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