From: Stewart Hildebrand <stewart.hildebrand@amd.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/6] x86: PCI: preserve IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN alignment
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:16:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <283e6dd9-a8b0-4943-9ceb-3f687013c885@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240709161936.GA175713@bhelgaas>
On 7/9/24 12:19, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 09:36:01AM -0400, Stewart Hildebrand wrote:
>> Currently, it's not possible to use the IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN flag on
>> x86 due to the alignment being overwritten in
>> pcibios_allocate_dev_resources(). Make one small change in arch/x86 to
>> make it work on x86.
>
> Is this a regression? I didn't look up when IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN was
> added, but likely it was for some situation on x86, so presumably it
> worked at one time. If something broke it in the meantime, it would
> be nice to identify the commit that broke it.
No, I don't have reason to believe it's a regression.
IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN was introduced in commit 884525655d07 ("PCI: clean
up resource alignment management").
There are some interesting commits mentioning 884525655d07:
5f17cfce5776 ("PCI: fix pbus_size_mem() resource alignment for CardBus
controllers")
934b7024f0ed ("Fix cardbus resource allocation")
It would seem that 884525655d07 missed updating the bits in
arch/x86/pci/i386.c. I don't think a Fixes: tag is strictly necessary
because I think the issue would only start to trigger once the default
alignment is updated in the last patch of this series.
As far as I can tell, it only breaks in a certain corner case that's not
really possible to trigger yet. The corner case seems to be the
following:
* Only on x86
* The BAR has been set in firmware
* Alignment has been requested via IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN
* The IORESOURCE_UNSET flag is set
* Only PCI_STD_RESOURCES and PCI_IOV_RESOURCES resources (not bridge
windows)
I think the reason this hasn't been seen until now is that it's not
possible to request IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN alignment via the
pci=resource_alignment= option. That option instead sets
IORESOURCE_SIZEALIGN, and in that case it works fine.
After the last patch in this series that changes the default alignment,
we will be starting to use IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN on all
not-sufficiently-aligned resources, and the corner case would be more
likely (rather, possible at all) to trigger.
My commit message is overstating the severity of the issue. So, how
about I make the commit message less scary:
There is a corner case in pcibios_allocate_dev_resources() that doesn't
account for IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN, in which case the alignment would be
overwritten. As far as I can tell, the corner case is not yet possible
to trigger, but it will be possible once the resource alignment changes.
Account for IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN in preparation for changing the
default resource alignment.
> Nit: follow the subject line conventions for this and the other
> patches. Learn them with "git log --oneline". For this patch,
> "x86/PCI: <Capitalized text>" is appropriate.
Thanks for pointing this out, I'll fix
>> Signed-off-by: Stewart Hildebrand <stewart.hildebrand@amd.com>
>> ---
>> RFC: We don't have enough info in this function to re-calculate the
>> alignment value in case of IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN. Luckily our
>> alignment value seems to be intact, so just don't touch it...
>> Alternatively, we could call pci_reassigndev_resource_alignment()
>> after the loop. Would that be preferable?
Any comments on this? After some more thought, I think calling
pci_reassigndev_resource_alignment() after the loop is probably more
correct, so if there aren't any comments, I'll plan on changing it.
>> ---
>> arch/x86/pci/i386.c | 7 +++++--
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/pci/i386.c b/arch/x86/pci/i386.c
>> index f2f4a5d50b27..ff6e61389ec7 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/pci/i386.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/pci/i386.c
>> @@ -283,8 +283,11 @@ static void pcibios_allocate_dev_resources(struct pci_dev *dev, int pass)
>> /* We'll assign a new address later */
>> pcibios_save_fw_addr(dev,
>> idx, r->start);
>> - r->end -= r->start;
>> - r->start = 0;
>> + if (!(r->flags &
>> + IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN)) {
>> + r->end -= r->start;
>> + r->start = 0;
>> + }
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> --
>> 2.45.2
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-10 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-09 13:35 [PATCH 0/6] PCI: align small (<4k) BARs Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:35 ` [PATCH 1/6] PCI: don't clear already cleared bit Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:35 ` [PATCH 2/6] PCI: restore resource alignment Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:36 ` [PATCH 3/6] PCI: restore memory decoding after reallocation Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 16:16 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-10 20:31 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:36 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] x86: PCI: preserve IORESOURCE_STARTALIGN alignment Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 16:19 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-10 16:16 ` Stewart Hildebrand [this message]
2024-07-10 21:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-10 22:49 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-11 18:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-11 18:58 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-11 20:35 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-15 17:26 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-10 14:05 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-07-15 17:30 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:36 ` [PATCH 5/6] PCI: don't reassign resources that are already aligned Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 13:36 ` [PATCH 6/6] PCI: align small (<4k) BARs Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-09 16:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-07-10 16:35 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-10 13:56 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-07-10 16:28 ` Stewart Hildebrand
2024-07-10 23:26 ` [PATCH 0/6] " Stewart Hildebrand
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=283e6dd9-a8b0-4943-9ceb-3f687013c885@amd.com \
--to=stewart.hildebrand@amd.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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®