The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Bernatowicz, Marcin" <marcin.bernatowicz@linux.intel.com>
To: Simon Richter <Simon.Richter@hogyros.de>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Michal Wajdeczko" <michal.wajdeczko@intel.com>,
	"Michał Winiarski" <michal.winiarski@intel.com>,
	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
	"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
	"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
	intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF BAR sizing after VF ReBAR
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 13:39:01 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3d43f08a-cbc2-4491-b563-244d321242e2@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <be4bffdc-7e41-4fa9-a8df-c41dc6357225@hogyros.de>


On 8/3/2026 1:17 PM, Simon Richter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 8/3/26 7:30 PM, Marcin Bernatowicz wrote:
>> PF drivers can resize a VF BAR using VF Resizable BAR (ReBAR) support 
>> via
>> pci_iov_vf_bar_set_size(). The new size persists in the SR-IOV 
>> capability
>> config space. A later reprobe / unplug-rescan / next pci_enable_sriov()
>> then sees the inflated VF BAR registers, and the PCI core reserves MMIO
>> based on that size multiplied by TotalVFs.
>
> Would it make sense for pci_enable_sriov() to check for a ReBAR 
> capability in the VF and set it to the smallest possible setting, so 
> we get the same behaviour regardless of whether this was cleaned up 
> correctly?
>
> Also, should it be "previous" or "smallest" size (in order to not make 
> a missed cleanup permanent)?
>
> I'm a bit worried about POWER, while we do have lots of MMIO space, we 
> also use kexec() quite a lot because on several machines, the 
> bootloader is some ancient minimal Linux system.
>
>    Simon

Hi Simon,

Thanks for the point.

I think an unconditional reset in pci_enable_sriov() would conflict with 
PF drivers
that intentionally set VF ReBAR before enable (Xe does this in its 
sriov_configure flow).
A core reset-to-smallest would override that policy.

For this reason, this series restores the initial-at-probe size in 
SR-IOV lifecycle cleanup paths
(disable, enable failure, PF remove), which fixes persistence from this 
kernel without forcing a global sizing policy.

You are right that kexec can inherit an already mutated value from an 
older kernel;
that limitation exists, but this series prevents further drift once 
running on a patched kernel.

Thanks,
Marcin

      reply	other threads:[~2026-08-04 11:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-05 17:00 [PATCH 0/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF BAR sizing after VF ReBAR Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-05-05 17:00 ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/IOV: Remember initial VF BAR sizes Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-05-05 17:00 ` [PATCH 2/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF ReBAR sizes on SR-IOV disable/failure Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-05-05 17:00 ` [PATCH 3/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF ReBAR sizes on PF release Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-08-03 10:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF BAR sizing after VF ReBAR Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-08-03 10:30   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] PCI/IOV: Remember initial VF BAR sizes Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-08-03 10:30   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF ReBAR sizes on SR-IOV disable/failure Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-08-03 10:30   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF ReBAR sizes on PF driver remove Marcin Bernatowicz
2026-08-03 11:17   ` [PATCH v2 0/3] PCI/IOV: Restore initial VF BAR sizing after VF ReBAR Simon Richter
2026-08-04 11:39     ` Bernatowicz, Marcin [this message]

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=3d43f08a-cbc2-4491-b563-244d321242e2@linux.intel.com \
    --to=marcin.bernatowicz@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=Simon.Richter@hogyros.de \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
    --cc=michal.winiarski@intel.com \
    --cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.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