From: Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH] PCI: Fix prefetchable range broken in pci_bridge_check_ranges
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 15:24:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1506151482-113560-1-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com> (raw)
When double checking 64bit prefetch range, we will change the prefetch range
in a time slot by writing 0xffffffff to PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32. This may break
transfers through related bridge at that time.
E.g. if we have below PCIe topology:
-[0000:00]-+-00.0-[01-02]--+-00.0 Device 8086:10fb
| \-00.1 Device 8086:10fb
\-08.0-[03]----00.0 Device 8086:0953
When rescan 00:08.0, it will call:
pci_rescan_bus
-> pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources
-> __pci_bus_size_bridges
-> pci_bridge_check_ranges
-> pci_write_config_dword(bridge, PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32, 0xffffffff)
This will change the prefetch range of 00:00.0 in a time slot, so traffic of
01:00.0 or 01:00.1 may be broken.
In fact, we can get if one bridge supports 64bit range by the bottom 4bits of
prefetchable memory base/limit. Honestly speaking, I don't know why 1f82de10d6b1
("PCI/86: don't assume prefetchable ranges are 64bit") has added the double
check code.
So Can we remove the double checking of prefetchable range to avoid this problem?
Signed-off-by: Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>
---
drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 14 --------------
1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
index 958da7d..23010a9 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c
@@ -778,20 +778,6 @@ static void pci_bridge_check_ranges(struct pci_bus *bus)
b_res[2].flags |= PCI_PREF_RANGE_TYPE_64;
}
}
-
- /* double check if bridge does support 64 bit pref */
- if (b_res[2].flags & IORESOURCE_MEM_64) {
- u32 mem_base_hi, tmp;
- pci_read_config_dword(bridge, PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32,
- &mem_base_hi);
- pci_write_config_dword(bridge, PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32,
- 0xffffffff);
- pci_read_config_dword(bridge, PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32, &tmp);
- if (!tmp)
- b_res[2].flags &= ~IORESOURCE_MEM_64;
- pci_write_config_dword(bridge, PCI_PREF_BASE_UPPER32,
- mem_base_hi);
- }
}
/* Helper function for sizing routines: find first available
--
1.9.1
next reply other threads:[~2017-09-23 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-09-23 7:24 Zhou Wang [this message]
2017-09-30 1:15 ` [RFC PATCH] PCI: Fix prefetchable range broken in pci_bridge_check_ranges Zhou Wang
2017-10-02 4:17 ` Yinghai Lu
2017-10-02 20:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2017-10-10 8:16 ` Zhou Wang
2017-10-17 7:00 ` Yinghai Lu
2017-10-09 10:40 ` Zhou Wang
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=1506151482-113560-1-git-send-email-wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
--to=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).