LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
To: Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>, Oliver <oohall@gmail.com>
Cc: Sam Bobroff <sbobroff@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	rppt@linux.ibm.com, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	xyjxie@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: Introduce pcibios_ignore_alignment_request
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 13:39:47 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e6b9d7d-5d18-645e-5ef9-6b8a77fa62e9@ozlabs.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bccfec8f-c8a4-fac1-7e96-be84113b9a73@anastas.io>



On 28/05/2019 17:39, Shawn Anastasio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 5/28/19 1:27 AM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28/05/2019 15:36, Oliver wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:03 PM Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Introduce a new pcibios function pcibios_ignore_alignment_request
>>>> which allows the PCI core to defer to platform-specific code to
>>>> determine whether or not to ignore alignment requests for PCI
>>>> resources.
>>>>
>>>> The existing behavior is to simply ignore alignment requests when
>>>> PCI_PROBE_ONLY is set. This is behavior is maintained by the
>>>> default implementation of pcibios_ignore_alignment_request.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>
>>>> ---
>>>>   drivers/pci/pci.c   | 9 +++++++--
>>>>   include/linux/pci.h | 1 +
>>>>   2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> index 8abc843b1615..8207a09085d1 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> @@ -5882,6 +5882,11 @@ resource_size_t __weak
>>>> pcibios_default_alignment(void)
>>>>          return 0;
>>>>   }
>>>>
>>>> +int __weak pcibios_ignore_alignment_request(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       return pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>   #define RESOURCE_ALIGNMENT_PARAM_SIZE COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
>>>>   static char
>>>> resource_alignment_param[RESOURCE_ALIGNMENT_PARAM_SIZE] = {0};
>>>>   static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(resource_alignment_lock);
>>>> @@ -5906,9 +5911,9 @@ static resource_size_t
>>>> pci_specified_resource_alignment(struct pci_dev *dev,
>>>>          p = resource_alignment_param;
>>>>          if (!*p && !align)
>>>>                  goto out;
>>>> -       if (pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY)) {
>>>> +       if (pcibios_ignore_alignment_request()) {
>>>>                  align = 0;
>>>> -               pr_info_once("PCI: Ignoring requested alignments
>>>> (PCI_PROBE_ONLY)\n");
>>>> +               pr_info_once("PCI: Ignoring requested alignments\n");
>>>>                  goto out;
>>>>          }
>>>
>>> I think the logic here is questionable to begin with. If the user has
>>> explicitly requested re-aligning a resource via the command line then
>>> we should probably do it even if PCI_PROBE_ONLY is set. When it breaks
>>> they get to keep the pieces.
>>>
>>> That said, the real issue here is that PCI_PROBE_ONLY probably
>>> shouldn't be set under qemu/kvm. Under the other hypervisor (PowerVM)
>>> hotplugged devices are configured by firmware before it's passed to
>>> the guest and we need to keep the FW assignments otherwise things
>>> break. QEMU however doesn't do any BAR assignments and relies on that
>>> being handled by the guest. At boot time this is done by SLOF, but
>>> Linux only keeps SLOF around until it's extracted the device-tree.
>>> Once that's done SLOF gets blown away and the kernel needs to do it's
>>> own BAR assignments. I'm guessing there's a hack in there to make it
>>> work today, but it's a little surprising that it works at all...
>>
>>
>> The hack is to run a modified qemu-aware "/usr/sbin/rtas_errd" in the
>> guest which receives an event from qemu (RAS_EPOW from
>> /proc/interrupts), fetches device tree chunks (and as I understand it -
>> they come with BARs from phyp but without from qemu) and writes "1" to
>> "/sys/bus/pci/rescan" which calls pci_assign_resource() eventually:
> 
> Interesting. Does this mean that the PHYP hotplug path doesn't
> call pci_assign_resource?


I'd expect dlpar_add_slot() to be called under phyp and eventually
pci_device_add() which (I think) may or may not trigger later reassignment.


> If so it means the patch may not
> break that platform after all, though it still may not be
> the correct way of doing things.


We should probably stop enforcing the PCI_PROBE_ONLY flag - it seems
that (unless resource_alignment= is used) the pseries guest should just
walk through all allocated resources and leave them unchanged.



>> [c000000006e6f960] [c0000000005f62d4] pci_assign_resource+0x44/0x360
>>
>> [c000000006e6fa10] [c0000000005f8b54]
>> assign_requested_resources_sorted+0x84/0x110
>> [c000000006e6fa60] [c0000000005f9540]
>> __assign_resources_sorted+0xd0/0x750
>> [c000000006e6fb40] [c0000000005fb2e0]
>> __pci_bus_assign_resources+0x80/0x280
>> [c000000006e6fc00] [c0000000005fb95c]
>> pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources+0xbc/0x100
>> [c000000006e6fc60] [c0000000005e3d74] pci_rescan_bus+0x34/0x60
>>
>> [c000000006e6fc90] [c0000000005f1ef4] rescan_store+0x84/0xc0
>>
>> [c000000006e6fcd0] [c00000000068060c] bus_attr_store+0x3c/0x60
>>
>> [c000000006e6fcf0] [c00000000037853c] sysfs_kf_write+0x5c/0x80
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> IIRC Sam Bobroff was looking at hotplug under pseries recently so he
>>> might have something to add. He's sick at the moment, but I'll ask him
>>> to take a look at this once he's back among the living
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> index 4a5a84d7bdd4..47471dcdbaf9 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> @@ -1990,6 +1990,7 @@ static inline void
>>>> pcibios_penalize_isa_irq(int irq, int active) {}
>>>>   int pcibios_alloc_irq(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>>>   void pcibios_free_irq(struct pci_dev *dev);
>>>>   resource_size_t pcibios_default_alignment(void);
>>>> +int pcibios_ignore_alignment_request(void);
>>>>
>>>>   #ifdef CONFIG_HIBERNATE_CALLBACKS
>>>>   extern struct dev_pm_ops pcibios_pm_ops;
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.20.1
>>>>
>>

-- 
Alexey

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-30  3:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-28  4:03 [PATCH v3 0/3] Allow custom PCI resource alignment on pseries Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-28  4:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: Introduce pcibios_ignore_alignment_request Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-28  5:36   ` Oliver
2019-05-28  5:50     ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-28  6:27     ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2019-05-28  7:39       ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-30  3:39         ` Alexey Kardashevskiy [this message]
2019-05-30 22:49           ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-31  3:56             ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2019-06-03  2:23               ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-06-03  5:02                 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2019-06-03  8:35                   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2019-06-03  9:12                     ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-29 14:00     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2019-05-30  6:55     ` [EXTERNAL] " Sam Bobroff
2019-05-30 22:33       ` Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-28  4:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] powerpc/64: Enable pcibios_after_init hook on ppc64 Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-28  4:03 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] powerpc/pseries: Allow user-specified PCI resource alignment after init Shawn Anastasio
2019-05-29 14:02   ` Bjorn Helgaas

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=3e6b9d7d-5d18-645e-5ef9-6b8a77fa62e9@ozlabs.ru \
    --to=aik@ozlabs.ru \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=oohall@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=sbobroff@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=shawn@anastas.io \
    --cc=xyjxie@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] PCI: Introduce pcibios_ignore_alignment_request' \
    /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

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).