diff mbox

[v7,0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64

Message ID CA+sq2Ccok5wtKjCZUkBhhj3WsiqFAoMgHK7LY210aBtMku+8SA@mail.gmail.com
State Rejected
Headers show

Commit Message

Sunil Kovvuri May 16, 2014, 10:33 a.m. UTC
Hi Liviu,

I am using your ARM64 PCIe patches to write a PCIe host controller
driver for our SOC. I am facing an issue with SR-IOV capable device.

Consider an PCI Express endpoint connected to a PCI Express
Root Port.  The PCI Express endpoint provides PCI-SIG SR-IOV
capabilities with a single physical function and a large number
of virtual functions.  The Root Port contains a pci-pci bridge in
between it and the SR-IOV device.

When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
(pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".

In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)

 296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
 297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
 298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
 299                 if (res->parent)
 300                         nres++;
 301         }
 302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
 303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
 SR-IOV\n");
 304                 return -ENOMEM;
 305         }

Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
that resource.

Added below api to your patch.
This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
inturn sets 'res->parent'.

Let me know if this is okay.

> This patch adds support for PCI to AArch64. It is based on my v7 patch
> that adds support for creating generic host bridge structure from
> device tree. With that in place, I was able to boot a platform that
> has PCIe host bridge support and use a PCIe network card.
>
> I have dropped the RFC tag from the subject as I now have the ambitious goal
> of trying to get it mainlined.
>
> Changes from v6:
>   - Guard the pci_domain_nr() inline implementation with #ifdef CONFIG_PCI as
>     to avoid conflict with default empty version present in include/linux/pci.h.
>     Thanks to Jingoo Han for catching this.
>
> Changes from v5:
>   - Removed pcibios_fixup_bridge_ranges() as the week default version is fine.
>   - Removed the ALIGN() call in pcibios_align_resource()
>   - Stopped exporting pcibios_align_resource()
>
> Changes from v4:
>   - Fixed the pci_domain_nr() implementation for arm64. Now we use
>     find_pci_host_bride() to find the host bridge before we retrieve
>     the domain number.
>
> Changes from v3:
>   - Added Acks accumulated so far ;)
>   - Still carrying Catalin's patch for moving the PCI_IO_BASE until it
>     lands in linux-next or mainline, in order to ease applying the series
>
> Changes from v2:
>   - Implement an arch specific version of pci_register_io_range() and
>     pci_address_to_pio().
>   - Return 1 from pci_proc_domain().
>
> Changes from v1:
>   - Added Catalin's patch for moving the PCI_IO_BASE location and extend
>     its size to 16MB
>   - Integrated Arnd's version of pci_ioremap_io that uses a bitmap for
>     keeping track of assigned IO space and returns an io_offset. At the
>     moment the code is added in arch/arm64 but it can be moved in drivers/pci.
>   - Added a fix for the generic ioport_map() function when !CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP
>     as suggested by Arnd.
>
> v6 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/5/41
> v5 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/4/307
> v4 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/3/298
> v3 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/28/211
> v2 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/27/255
> v1 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/3/389
>
>
> The API used is different from the one used by ARM architecture. There is
> no pci_common_init_dev() function and no hw_pci structure, as that is no
> longer needed. Once the last signature is added to the legal agreement, I
> will post the host bridge driver code that I am using. Meanwhile, here
> is an example of what the probe function looks like, posted as an example:
>
> static int myhostbridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
>         int err;
>         struct device_node *dev;
>         struct pci_host_bridge *bridge;
>         struct myhostbridge_port *pp;
>         resource_size_t lastbus;
>
>         dev = pdev->dev.of_node;
>
>         if (!of_device_is_available(dev)) {
>                 pr_warn("%s: disabled\n", dev->full_name);
>                 return -ENODEV;
>         }
>
>         pp = kzalloc(sizeof(struct myhostbridge_port), GFP_KERNEL);
>         if (!pp)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
>
>         bridge = of_create_pci_host_bridge(&pdev->dev, &myhostbridge_ops, pp);
>         if (IS_ERR(bridge)) {
>                 err = PTR_ERR(bridge);
>                 goto bridge_create_fail;
>         }
>
>         err = myhostbridge_setup(bridge->bus);
>         if (err)
>                 goto bridge_setup_fail;
>
>         /* We always enable PCI domains and we keep domain 0 backward
>          * compatible in /proc for video cards
>          */
>         pci_add_flags(PCI_ENABLE_PROC_DOMAINS);
>         pci_add_flags(PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_BUS | PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_RSRC);
>
>         lastbus = pci_scan_child_bus(bridge->bus);
>         pci_bus_update_busn_res_end(bridge->bus, lastbus);
>
>         pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources(bridge->bus);
>
>         pci_bus_add_devices(bridge->bus);
>
>         return 0;
>
> bridge_setup_fail:
>         put_device(&bridge->dev);
>         device_unregister(&bridge->dev);
> bridge_create_fail:
>         kfree(pp);
>         return err;
> }
>
> Best regards,
> Liviu
>
>
> Catalin Marinas (1):
>   arm64: Extend the PCI I/O space to 16MB
>
> Liviu Dudau (2):
>   Fix ioport_map() for !CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP cases.
>   arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
>
>  Documentation/arm64/memory.txt |  16 +--
>  arch/arm64/Kconfig             |  19 +++-
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/Kbuild  |   1 +
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h    |   5 +-
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h   |  51 +++++++++
>  arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile     |   1 +
>  arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c        | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/asm-generic/io.h       |   2 +-
>  8 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
>  create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>
> --
> 1.9.0
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Liviu Dudau May 16, 2014, 1:24 p.m. UTC | #1
Hi Sunil,

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:33:04AM +0100, Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> Hi Liviu,
> 
> I am using your ARM64 PCIe patches to write a PCIe host controller
> driver for our SOC. I am facing an issue with SR-IOV capable device.
> 
> Consider an PCI Express endpoint connected to a PCI Express
> Root Port.  The PCI Express endpoint provides PCI-SIG SR-IOV
> capabilities with a single physical function and a large number
> of virtual functions.  The Root Port contains a pci-pci bridge in
> between it and the SR-IOV device.
> 
> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".
> 
> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
> 
>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>  299                 if (res->parent)
>  300                         nres++;
>  301         }
>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>  SR-IOV\n");
>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>  305         }
> 
> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
> that resource.
> 
> Added below api to your patch.
> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
> 
> Let me know if this is okay.
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index 9f29c9a..fbfb48f 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -125,6 +125,21 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void
> *data, const struct resource *res,
>         return res->start;
>  }
> 
> +int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> +        unsigned int i, type_mask = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM;
> +        struct resource *res;
> +
> +        for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> +                res = &pdev->resource[i];
> +                if (res->parent || !(res->flags & type_mask))
> +                        continue;
> +                pci_claim_resource(pdev, i);
> +        }
> +
> 

I would like not to have to add your patch in this file as I am trying to
remove it entirely. I don't have an SR-IOV capable device in my setup so
I am not able to debug your problem, but could you have a go and try to
figure out why the SR-IOV resources do not get a parent associated with
when they get created?

Many thanks,
Liviu
Sunil Kovvuri May 16, 2014, 5:42 p.m. UTC | #2
Hi Liviu,

Issue may not be only with SR-IOV resources.

I am not an expert with Linux PCI core. But i am trying to understand
how even for a non SR-IOV capable device's resource, gets a parent
associated with it.

When a PCI device driver calls pci_enable_device() which inturn calls
'arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c' pcibios_enable_device() which uses Linux PCI core
API 'pci_enable_resources'. This API checks 'res->parent' for all
valid resources
before enabling them, otherwise it fails.
                if (!r->parent) {
                        dev_err(&dev->dev, "device not available "
                                "(can't reserve %pR)\n", r);
                        return -EINVAL;
                }

Can you please let me know where this hierarchy is being set for
'pcibios_enable_resources' to work.

I could only find request_resource() API which sets the parent and
pci_claim_resource() uses this.

Thanks,
Sunil.

On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi Sunil,
>
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:33:04AM +0100, Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
>> Hi Liviu,
>>
>> I am using your ARM64 PCIe patches to write a PCIe host controller
>> driver for our SOC. I am facing an issue with SR-IOV capable device.
>>
>> Consider an PCI Express endpoint connected to a PCI Express
>> Root Port.  The PCI Express endpoint provides PCI-SIG SR-IOV
>> capabilities with a single physical function and a large number
>> of virtual functions.  The Root Port contains a pci-pci bridge in
>> between it and the SR-IOV device.
>>
>> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
>> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
>> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".
>>
>> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
>>
>>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>>  299                 if (res->parent)
>>  300                         nres++;
>>  301         }
>>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>>  SR-IOV\n");
>>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>>  305         }
>>
>> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
>> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
>> that resource.
>>
>> Added below api to your patch.
>> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
>> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
>>
>> Let me know if this is okay.
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> index 9f29c9a..fbfb48f 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>> @@ -125,6 +125,21 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void
>> *data, const struct resource *res,
>>         return res->start;
>>  }
>>
>> +int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> +{
>> +        unsigned int i, type_mask = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM;
>> +        struct resource *res;
>> +
>> +        for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
>> +                res = &pdev->resource[i];
>> +                if (res->parent || !(res->flags & type_mask))
>> +                        continue;
>> +                pci_claim_resource(pdev, i);
>> +        }
>> +
>>
>
> I would like not to have to add your patch in this file as I am trying to
> remove it entirely. I don't have an SR-IOV capable device in my setup so
> I am not able to debug your problem, but could you have a go and try to
> figure out why the SR-IOV resources do not get a parent associated with
> when they get created?
>
> Many thanks,
> Liviu
>
>
> --
> ====================
> | I would like to |
> | fix the world,  |
> | but they're not |
> | giving me the   |
>  \ source code!  /
>   ---------------
>     ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Arnd Bergmann May 19, 2014, 1:01 p.m. UTC | #3
On Friday 16 May 2014 16:03:04 Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".

I assume you have checked that there is indeed enough MMIO space
available, right?

> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
> 
>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>  299                 if (res->parent)
>  300                         nres++;
>  301         }
>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>  SR-IOV\n");
>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>  305         }
> 
> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
> that resource.
> 
> Added below api to your patch.
> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
> inturn sets 'res->parent'.

This looks like the wrong approach. The PCI host controller should
really have been registered with the root 'iomem_resource' during
the probe of the host controller.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sunil Kovvuri May 20, 2014, 4:22 a.m. UTC | #4
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Friday 16 May 2014 16:03:04 Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
>> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
>> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
>> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".
>
> I assume you have checked that there is indeed enough MMIO space
> available, right?
>
Yes, i have checked for enough MMIO space multiple times.

>> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
>>
>>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>>  299                 if (res->parent)
>>  300                         nres++;
>>  301         }
>>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>>  SR-IOV\n");
>>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>>  305         }
>>
>> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
>> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
>> that resource.
>>
>> Added below api to your patch.
>> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
>> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
>
> This looks like the wrong approach. The PCI host controller should
> really have been registered with the root 'iomem_resource' during
> the probe of the host controller.
>
>         Arnd
I didn't get this, if a SR-IOV device is connected to a PCI-PCI bridge
and inturn bridge connected to root port. Then the parent bus is not root,
but the bridge.  The issue is either hierarchy should not be checked for
SR-IOV resources or someone should set the hierarchy (i.e parent resources).

Regards,
Sunil.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Arnd Bergmann May 20, 2014, 8:44 a.m. UTC | #5
On Tuesday 20 May 2014 09:52:33 Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> >> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
> >>
> >>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
> >>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
> >>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
> >>  299                 if (res->parent)
> >>  300                         nres++;
> >>  301         }
> >>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
> >>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
> >>  SR-IOV\n");
> >>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
> >>  305         }
> >>
> >> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
> >> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
> >> that resource.
> >>
> >> Added below api to your patch.
> >> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
> >> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
> >
> > This looks like the wrong approach. The PCI host controller should
> > really have been registered with the root 'iomem_resource' during
> > the probe of the host controller.
> >
> I didn't get this, if a SR-IOV device is connected to a PCI-PCI bridge
> and inturn bridge connected to root port. Then the parent bus is not root,
> but the bridge.  The issue is either hierarchy should not be checked for
> SR-IOV resources or someone should set the hierarchy (i.e parent resources).

Ah, I misunderstood the problem, I thought the PCI core was complaining
about lack of space in the resources, not about a lack of BARs.

It seems there is code like yours in a couple of architectures, but they
only claim the resources of bridges, not the actual devices as you
seem to be doing. Can you check if the x86 version of
pcibios_allocate_bus_resources() does the trick for you? Maybe we can
turn that into a generic helper.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sunil Kovvuri May 20, 2014, 8:55 a.m. UTC | #6
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 May 2014 09:52:33 Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
>> >> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
>> >>
>> >>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>> >>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>> >>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>> >>  299                 if (res->parent)
>> >>  300                         nres++;
>> >>  301         }
>> >>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>> >>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>> >>  SR-IOV\n");
>> >>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>> >>  305         }
>> >>
>> >> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
>> >> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
>> >> that resource.
>> >>
>> >> Added below api to your patch.
>> >> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
>> >> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
>> >
>> > This looks like the wrong approach. The PCI host controller should
>> > really have been registered with the root 'iomem_resource' during
>> > the probe of the host controller.
>> >
>> I didn't get this, if a SR-IOV device is connected to a PCI-PCI bridge
>> and inturn bridge connected to root port. Then the parent bus is not root,
>> but the bridge.  The issue is either hierarchy should not be checked for
>> SR-IOV resources or someone should set the hierarchy (i.e parent resources).
>
> Ah, I misunderstood the problem, I thought the PCI core was complaining
> about lack of space in the resources, not about a lack of BARs.
>
> It seems there is code like yours in a couple of architectures, but they
> only claim the resources of bridges, not the actual devices as you
> seem to be doing. Can you check if the x86 version of
> pcibios_allocate_bus_resources() does the trick for you? Maybe we can
> turn that into a generic helper.
>
Thanks for the suggestion. Will try that once.
FYI, IA64 architecture does claim resources for devices as well.
arch/ia64/pci/pci.c  'pcibios_fixup_device_resources()'

Thanks,
Sunil.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Sunil Kovvuri May 21, 2014, 11:15 a.m. UTC | #7
Hi Liviu,

Sorry for the trouble.
I got why 'res->parent' is not set in my case.
Basically my SR-IOV device has fixed resources, so resources will not
be allocated/assigned and hence parent resource is not set.
I will move the resource claiming to host controller driver as a fixup
so that parent resource hierarchy is set.

Thanks for the support.

Regards,
Sunil.


On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Liviu,
>
> Issue may not be only with SR-IOV resources.
>
> I am not an expert with Linux PCI core. But i am trying to understand
> how even for a non SR-IOV capable device's resource, gets a parent
> associated with it.
>
> When a PCI device driver calls pci_enable_device() which inturn calls
> 'arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c' pcibios_enable_device() which uses Linux PCI core
> API 'pci_enable_resources'. This API checks 'res->parent' for all
> valid resources
> before enabling them, otherwise it fails.
>                 if (!r->parent) {
>                         dev_err(&dev->dev, "device not available "
>                                 "(can't reserve %pR)\n", r);
>                         return -EINVAL;
>                 }
>
> Can you please let me know where this hierarchy is being set for
> 'pcibios_enable_resources' to work.
>
> I could only find request_resource() API which sets the parent and
> pci_claim_resource() uses this.
>
> Thanks,
> Sunil.
>
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> wrote:
>> Hi Sunil,
>>
>> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:33:04AM +0100, Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
>>> Hi Liviu,
>>>
>>> I am using your ARM64 PCIe patches to write a PCIe host controller
>>> driver for our SOC. I am facing an issue with SR-IOV capable device.
>>>
>>> Consider an PCI Express endpoint connected to a PCI Express
>>> Root Port.  The PCI Express endpoint provides PCI-SIG SR-IOV
>>> capabilities with a single physical function and a large number
>>> of virtual functions.  The Root Port contains a pci-pci bridge in
>>> between it and the SR-IOV device.
>>>
>>> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
>>> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
>>> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".
>>>
>>> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
>>>
>>>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>>>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
>>>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
>>>  299                 if (res->parent)
>>>  300                         nres++;
>>>  301         }
>>>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
>>>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
>>>  SR-IOV\n");
>>>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
>>>  305         }
>>>
>>> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
>>> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
>>> that resource.
>>>
>>> Added below api to your patch.
>>> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
>>> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
>>>
>>> Let me know if this is okay.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>> index 9f29c9a..fbfb48f 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>> @@ -125,6 +125,21 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void
>>> *data, const struct resource *res,
>>>         return res->start;
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +        unsigned int i, type_mask = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM;
>>> +        struct resource *res;
>>> +
>>> +        for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
>>> +                res = &pdev->resource[i];
>>> +                if (res->parent || !(res->flags & type_mask))
>>> +                        continue;
>>> +                pci_claim_resource(pdev, i);
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>>
>>
>> I would like not to have to add your patch in this file as I am trying to
>> remove it entirely. I don't have an SR-IOV capable device in my setup so
>> I am not able to debug your problem, but could you have a go and try to
>> figure out why the SR-IOV resources do not get a parent associated with
>> when they get created?
>>
>> Many thanks,
>> Liviu
>>
>>
>> --
>> ====================
>> | I would like to |
>> | fix the world,  |
>> | but they're not |
>> | giving me the   |
>>  \ source code!  /
>>   ---------------
>>     ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Liviu Dudau May 21, 2014, 11:34 a.m. UTC | #8
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 04:45:29PM +0530, Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> Hi Liviu,
> 
> Sorry for the trouble.
> I got why 'res->parent' is not set in my case.
> Basically my SR-IOV device has fixed resources, so resources will not
> be allocated/assigned and hence parent resource is not set.
> I will move the resource claiming to host controller driver as a fixup
> so that parent resource hierarchy is set.
> 
> Thanks for the support.

Glad you worked out the cause for the problem. I will still at to my list of
ToDo things to investigate resource parenting with my patchset.

Best regards,
Liviu

> 
> Regards,
> Sunil.
> 
> 
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:12 PM, Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Liviu,
> >
> > Issue may not be only with SR-IOV resources.
> >
> > I am not an expert with Linux PCI core. But i am trying to understand
> > how even for a non SR-IOV capable device's resource, gets a parent
> > associated with it.
> >
> > When a PCI device driver calls pci_enable_device() which inturn calls
> > 'arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c' pcibios_enable_device() which uses Linux PCI core
> > API 'pci_enable_resources'. This API checks 'res->parent' for all
> > valid resources
> > before enabling them, otherwise it fails.
> >                 if (!r->parent) {
> >                         dev_err(&dev->dev, "device not available "
> >                                 "(can't reserve %pR)\n", r);
> >                         return -EINVAL;
> >                 }
> >
> > Can you please let me know where this hierarchy is being set for
> > 'pcibios_enable_resources' to work.
> >
> > I could only find request_resource() API which sets the parent and
> > pci_claim_resource() uses this.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Sunil.
> >
> > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> wrote:
> >> Hi Sunil,
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 11:33:04AM +0100, Sunil Kovvuri wrote:
> >>> Hi Liviu,
> >>>
> >>> I am using your ARM64 PCIe patches to write a PCIe host controller
> >>> driver for our SOC. I am facing an issue with SR-IOV capable device.
> >>>
> >>> Consider an PCI Express endpoint connected to a PCI Express
> >>> Root Port.  The PCI Express endpoint provides PCI-SIG SR-IOV
> >>> capabilities with a single physical function and a large number
> >>> of virtual functions.  The Root Port contains a pci-pci bridge in
> >>> between it and the SR-IOV device.
> >>>
> >>> When the SR-IOV capable device's driver tries to enable sriov
> >>> (pci_enable_sriov()) it fails to create/add PCI device for each
> >>> virtual function reporting  "not enough MMIO resources for SR-IOV".
> >>>
> >>> In sriov_enable() (drivers/pci/iov.c)
> >>>
> >>>  296        for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
> >>>  297                 bars |= (1 << (i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES));
> >>>  298                 res = dev->resource + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i;
> >>>  299                 if (res->parent)
> >>>  300                         nres++;
> >>>  301         }
> >>>  302         if (nres != iov->nres) {
> >>>  303                 dev_err(&dev->dev, "not enough MMIO resources for
> >>>  SR-IOV\n");
> >>>  304                 return -ENOMEM;
> >>>  305         }
> >>>
> >>> Here its checking if physical function's IOV resource has a parent or not.
> >>> Which is pci-pci bridge in this case. Otherwise it doesn't consider
> >>> that resource.
> >>>
> >>> Added below api to your patch.
> >>> This will try to claim a resource while creating a PCI device which
> >>> inturn sets 'res->parent'.
> >>>
> >>> Let me know if this is okay.
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> >>> index 9f29c9a..fbfb48f 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> >>> @@ -125,6 +125,21 @@ resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void
> >>> *data, const struct resource *res,
> >>>         return res->start;
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>> +int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> >>> +{
> >>> +        unsigned int i, type_mask = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM;
> >>> +        struct resource *res;
> >>> +
> >>> +        for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
> >>> +                res = &pdev->resource[i];
> >>> +                if (res->parent || !(res->flags & type_mask))
> >>> +                        continue;
> >>> +                pci_claim_resource(pdev, i);
> >>> +        }
> >>> +
> >>>
> >>
> >> I would like not to have to add your patch in this file as I am trying to
> >> remove it entirely. I don't have an SR-IOV capable device in my setup so
> >> I am not able to debug your problem, but could you have a go and try to
> >> figure out why the SR-IOV resources do not get a parent associated with
> >> when they get created?
> >>
> >> Many thanks,
> >> Liviu
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> ====================
> >> | I would like to |
> >> | fix the world,  |
> >> | but they're not |
> >> | giving me the   |
> >>  \ source code!  /
> >>   ---------------
> >>     ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> >>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
index 9f29c9a..fbfb48f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
@@ -125,6 +125,21 @@  resource_size_t pcibios_align_resource(void
*data, const struct resource *res,
        return res->start;
 }

+int pcibios_add_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
+{
+        unsigned int i, type_mask = IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM;
+        struct resource *res;
+
+        for (i = 0; i < PCI_NUM_RESOURCES; i++) {
+                res = &pdev->resource[i];
+                if (res->parent || !(res->flags & type_mask))
+                        continue;
+                pci_claim_resource(pdev, i);
+        }
+


On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>