On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 05:38:46PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 13-Nov-24 5:33 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 13-Nov-24 5:24 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 13-Nov-24 4:42 PM, Daniel Walker (danielwa) wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I bisected an issue of a missing pci device to commit 2841631 the commit title
> >>> in the subject line which was included in v6.1 stable branch.
> >>>
> >>> There was a later fix for a similar missing pci device commit 36c676e2 which
> >>> appears to be for Goldmont/Apollo Lake. The hardware I'm using is
> >>> Goldmont/Denverton. This fix did not appear to change the behavior I'm seeing.
> >>>
> >>> The pci device which is disappearing is a custom gpio device.
> >>>
> >>> I tested v6.12-rc5-next to see if any other changes had fixed the issue, but there was
> >>> no change in behavior since commit 2841631 .
> >>>
> >>> When booting up the device is shown in the pci boot messages but the device
> >>> doesn't end up making it to lspci once you get to a prompt.
> >>
> >> Please give the attached patch a try, this will hopefully fix things.
> >>
> >> Once I have confirmation that this fixes things I'll post it to the list.
> >>
> >> Note this will not backport to the 6.1 stable branch cleanly due to
> >> changes in the x86_cpu_id macros in mainline. Backporting it should
> >> be trivial. Please send a backport to stable@vger.kernel.org yourself
> >> once this has been merged upstream.
> >>
> >> If you backport this, please also backport 36c676e2 first.
> > 
> > Never mind, self nack. This is correct for Gemini Lake which
> > has its SPI at device.function 13.2 like Apollo Lake.
> > 
> > But looking at the dmesg Denverton actually has it at 1f.1
> > aka 31.1 like most other Intel SoCs.
> > 
> > Which make me wonder why this does not work on Denverton.
> > 
> > It probably has something to do with these 2 messages:
> > 
> > pci 0000:00:1f.1: BAR 0 [mem 0xfd000000-0xfdffffff 64bit]: can't claim; no compatible bridge window
> > pci 0000:00:1f.1: BAR 0 [mem 0x280000000-0x280ffffff 64bit]: assigned
> > 
> > I'm guessing that this re-assignment is messing up
> > the p2sb BAR caching, after which things go wrong.
> > 
> > Daniel, are you seeing similar messages with a working kernel ?
> 
> p.s. Can you also provide a full dmesg log from a working kernel ?
> 

Attached is a working dmesg from v6.8-rc1.

Daniel