mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>
To: Mike Habeck <habeck@sgi.com>
Cc: Mike Travis <travis@sgi.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	x86@kernel.org, Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
	Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch 1/1] x86 pci: Add option to not assign BAR's if not already assigned
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2010 10:40:38 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201006021040.39378.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C067E73.2010005@sgi.com>

On Wednesday, June 02, 2010 09:53:23 am Mike Habeck wrote:
> Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > I'm still having trouble reconciling the stated purpose, i.e., the
> > changelog, with the behavior.  The changelog implies that the patch
> > is required to make >16 devices with I/O BARs work at all, but per
> > Mike Habeck, the patch just gets rid of some warnings and maybe helps
> > with hot-add of devices using I/O space.
> 
> greaterthan 16 devices will still work if the BIOS doesn't assign
> the I/O BARs and the kernel does (including the devices that don't
> get assigned due to the kernel running out of I/O Port resources).
> And when the kernel runs out of I/O Port space it will warn for
> those devices it couldn't assign: (example):
> 
>    pci 0002:03:00.0: BAR 5: can't allocate I/O resource [0x0-0x7f]

[For anybody else grepping for this message, it is now "can't assign",
not "can't allocate".]

> But if the kernel assigns all the I/O Port space to these devices
> we know don't need it (thus the reason the BIOS didn't assign it)
> then I believe hot-add of devices using I/O space will fail.

Yes, I understand and agree with this motivation, though I hope
"pci=nobar" is recognized as only a short-term workaround.  I think
it's completely unacceptable in terms of the user experience.  Using
DMI quirks to turn it on automatically removes some user pain, but
it's not a real solution and still leaves a maintenance problem.

How about if we write a changelog that mentions hot-add of devices
that need I/O space?  :-)

> There is also the issue that quirk_system_pci_resources() thinks
> those unassigned I/O resources are using I/O port space 0x0-0xFF.
> Since the BIOS never assigned the BAR the kernel reads it as
> having a base of 0x0 and a limit of whatever the BAR size is when
> it writes all 1's to obtain the size.  So that results in
> quirk_system_pci_resources() disabling pnp devices: (example):
> 
>    pnp 00:11: io resource (0x92-0x92) overlaps 0002:03:00.0 BAR 0 (0x0-0xff), disabling
[...]
> 
> One could argue this is a quirk_system_pci_resources() issue and
> should be handled there rather than "zeroing out the resource if
> the bios didn't assign it" as the patch does, but what the patch
> is attempting to do (as stated above) is to allow the BIOS a way
> to not assign resources it knows are not needed and thus make sure
> the kernel doesn't override that... and in doing that the quirk
> issue goes away too.

This is definitely a problem, but I think it should be handled
separately.  The fact that this patch makes the "overlap" messages
go away is a nice coincidence, but it doesn't fix the underlying
issue.

I think setting the resource start/end to zero to "disable" it as in
this patch (and elsewhere) is just a hack -- we no longer know the size
of the BAR, the struct resource no longer corresponds to the BAR contents,
and I don't think we do anything with the PCI_COMMAND_IO/PCI_COMMAND_MEM
bits to actually disable the BAR, so the device probably still responds
at whatever we left in the BAR.

In quirk_system_pci_resources(), we set IORESOURCE_DISABLED rather than
setting the PNP resource start/end to zero, but that's a bit of a hack,
too.  All that does is prevent the PNP motherboard driver (pnp/system.c)
from requesting that region.  We don't actually do anything to stop the
device from responding to that address.

Bjorn

      reply	other threads:[~2010-06-02 16:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-12 18:14 Mike Travis
2010-05-13 18:56 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 19:08   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 19:12   ` Mike Travis
2010-05-13 19:13     ` Mike Travis
2010-05-13 19:54     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 20:27       ` Mike Habeck
2010-05-13 19:38   ` Mike Habeck
2010-05-13 20:02     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-13 20:09       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 22:25       ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 22:34         ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 22:35           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 22:40             ` Mike Travis
2010-05-15  2:25               ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 22:47           ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 22:59             ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 23:06               ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:23                 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-14 23:33                   ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:40                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-15  0:02                       ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:20             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 23:28               ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:32                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-14 23:34                   ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-14 23:39                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-15  0:00                       ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-15  0:14                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 20:36     ` Yinghai Lu
2010-05-13 20:34       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-13 18:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-05-28 16:53 ` Mike Travis
2010-05-28 17:00   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-28 17:10     ` Mike Travis
2010-05-28 19:28       ` Jesse Barnes
2010-05-28 20:04       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-05-31 11:12         ` Mike Travis
2010-05-31 16:36           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-01 22:49           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-06-02  7:31             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-02 15:45               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2010-06-02 15:47                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-02 15:53                   ` Jesse Barnes
2010-06-09  0:53                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-06-09  1:26                       ` Jesse Barnes
2010-06-09 14:23                         ` Mike Habeck
2010-06-02 15:53             ` Mike Habeck
2010-06-02 16:40               ` Bjorn Helgaas [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=201006021040.39378.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
    --to=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
    --cc=habeck@sgi.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=travis@sgi.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®