From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5B8FB70CB
	for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>;
	Fri,  8 Oct 2010 16:45:59 +1100 (EST)
Subject: Re: Problem with Infiniband adapter on IBM p550
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Patrick Finnegan <pat@computer-refuge.org>
In-Reply-To: <1286516470.2463.403.camel@pasglop>
References: <201010072324.33062.pat@computer-refuge.org>
	<1286516470.2463.403.camel@pasglop>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 16:45:49 +1100
Message-ID: <1286516749.2463.408.camel@pasglop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: paulus@samba.org,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>


> Ok, so from what I can tell, the driver is unhappy because either BAR 0
> hasn't been assigned a memory resource or the size doesn't match what
> the driver expects.
> 
Ooops, accidentally sent too quickly...

>>From your OF log I see:

reg                     00c10000 00000000 00000000  00000000 00000000 
                        03c10010 00000000 00000000  00000000 00100000 
                        43c10018 00000000 00000000  00000000 00800000 
                        43c10020 00000000 00000000  00000000 08000000 
assigned-addresses      83c10020 00000000 e8000000  00000000 08000000 

Now, I think this is the problem.

The "assigned-addresses" property seems to indicate that the firmware only
assigned BAR 4 and didn't assign anything to the other ones.

I don't know why, but it definitely looks like a firmware bug to me. On those
machines, PCI resource assignment is under hypervisor control and so Linux
cannot re-assign missing resources itself.

I'll see if I can find a FW person to shed some light on this.

Can you provide me (privately maybe) with the FW version on the machine ?

Cheers,
Ben.