From: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
To: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] powerpc/powernv: don't enable SRIOV when VF BAR has non 64bit-prefetchable BAR
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2015 18:55:10 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <560E466E.9080901@ozlabs.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1439949704-8023-2-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 08/19/2015 12:01 PM, Wei Yang wrote:
> On PHB_IODA2, we enable SRIOV devices by mapping IOV BAR with M64 BARs. If
> a SRIOV device's IOV BAR is not 64bit-prefetchable, this is not assigned
> from 64bit prefetchable window, which means M64 BAR can't work on it.
Please change the commit log to explain what limit came from where.
Something like:
PCI bridges support only 2 windows and the kernel code programs bridges in
the way that one window is 32bit-nonprefetchable and another one is
64bit-prefetchable. So if devices' IOV BAR is 64bit and non-prefetchable,
it will be mapped into 32bit space and therefore M64 cannot be used for it.
>
> This patch makes this explicit.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c | 25 +++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
> index 85cbc96..8c031b5 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
> @@ -908,9 +908,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_resource_shift(struct pci_dev *dev, int offset)
> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
> continue;
>
> - if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
> - continue;
> -
> /*
> * The actual IOV BAR range is determined by the start address
> * and the actual size for num_vfs VFs BAR. This check is to
> @@ -939,9 +936,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_resource_shift(struct pci_dev *dev, int offset)
> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
> continue;
>
> - if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
> - continue;
> -
> size = pci_iov_resource_size(dev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
> res2 = *res;
> res->start += size * offset;
> @@ -1221,9 +1215,6 @@ static int pnv_pci_vf_assign_m64(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 num_vfs)
> if (!res->flags || !res->parent)
> continue;
>
> - if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags))
> - continue;
> -
> for (j = 0; j < vf_groups; j++) {
> do {
> win = find_next_zero_bit(&phb->ioda.m64_bar_alloc,
> @@ -1510,6 +1501,12 @@ int pnv_pci_sriov_enable(struct pci_dev *pdev, u16 num_vfs)
> pdn = pci_get_pdn(pdev);
>
> if (phb->type == PNV_PHB_IODA2) {
> + if (!pdn->vfs_expanded) {
The patch claims it does make the limitation explicit but it is not clear
at all how to trace from vfs_expanded==0 to "non 64bit-prefetchable IOV BAR".
> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "don't support this SRIOV device"
> + " with non 64bit-prefetchable IOV BAR\n");
> + return -ENOSPC;
> + }
> +
> /* Calculate available PE for required VFs */
> mutex_lock(&phb->ioda.pe_alloc_mutex);
> pdn->offset = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(
> @@ -2775,9 +2772,10 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> if (!res->flags || res->parent)
> continue;
> if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags)) {
> - dev_warn(&pdev->dev, " non M64 VF BAR%d: %pR\n",
> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Don't support SR-IOV with"
> + " non M64 VF BAR%d: %pR. \n",
> i, res);
> - continue;
> + return;
> }
>
> size = pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
> @@ -2796,11 +2794,6 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> res = &pdev->resource[i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES];
> if (!res->flags || res->parent)
> continue;
> - if (!pnv_pci_is_mem_pref_64(res->flags)) {
And this check was quite clear. I'd keep this one.
> - dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Skipping expanding VF BAR%d: %pR\n",
> - i, res);
> - continue;
> - }
>
> dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, " Fixing VF BAR%d: %pR to\n", i, res);
> size = pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
>
--
Alexey
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-02 8:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-19 2:01 [PATCH V4 0/6] Redesign SR-IOV on PowerNV Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 1/6] powerpc/powernv: don't enable SRIOV when VF BAR has non 64bit-prefetchable BAR Wei Yang
2015-10-02 8:55 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy [this message]
2015-10-08 6:29 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 2/6] powerpc/powernv: simplify the calculation of iov resource alignment Wei Yang
2015-10-02 8:58 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-08 6:39 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 3/6] powerpc/powernv: use one M64 BAR in Single PE mode for one VF BAR Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:21 ` Gavin Shan
2015-10-02 9:29 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-08 7:06 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 4/6] powerpc/powernv: replace the hard coded boundary with gate Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 5/6] powerpc/powernv: boundary the total VF BAR size instead of the individual one Wei Yang
2015-10-02 9:51 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-08 7:13 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:01 ` [PATCH V4 6/6] powerpc/powernv: allocate sparse PE# when using M64 BAR in Single PE mode Wei Yang
2015-08-19 2:21 ` Gavin Shan
2015-10-02 10:05 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-08 7:19 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-26 5:11 ` [PATCH V4 0/6] Redesign SR-IOV on PowerNV Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-26 8:06 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-02 10:07 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-10-07 2:43 ` Michael Ellerman
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=560E466E.9080901@ozlabs.ru \
--to=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).