lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Peer bridge fixup issue under multiple pci domain
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> 于2018年8月28日周二 下午7:35写道:
>
> [+cc EDAC folks, LKML]
>
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 10:58:57PM +0800, Zihan Yang wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm trying to use multiple pci domain in qemu q35, but I find there
> > might be some issues in peer bridge fixup.
> >
> > In short, pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges function assumes only one pci
> > domain (0) by default. This is OK when as qemu by default uses only
> > one pci domain too. However, if I add another host bridge which is
> > put into pci domain 1 by using _SEG, and a pcie_pci_bridge is attached
> > to the bus 1 under this new pci domain 1 rather than domain 0, the
> > kernel will recognize the bus 01 differently.
> >
> > More specifically, pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges only reads all the buses
> > under domain 0 but it can read the pci bus 01 in pci domain 1 and treat
> > it as a peer bus of 0000:00. The consequence is this 01 bus is recognized
> > as 0000:01, but it should have been recognized as 0001:01.
> >
> > The host bus 0001:00 can be recognized so I guess pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges
> > needs updating to take care of multiple domains? Or is it just an bios issue?
> > I'm not quite sure and I'm open to any suggestions.
>
> Is there something that actually does not work, or is this just a
> concern that the code looks wrong?

Sorry for the late reply, currently it is just a concern because the
qemu part is
still ongoing and I'm not quite sure about the root cause. But my disussion with
qemu developers indicate my issue might originates from incorrect AML, which
includes _SEG, _BBN and _CRS as you state below. I will try to locate the real
cause recently.

> pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges() is ancient history from before x86 used
> the ACPI namespace to discover host bridges. It blindly probes for
> devices on buses 0-255, but as you say, only in domain 0.
>
> Using multiple PCI domains really requires ACPI support so we know
> what the other domains are (_SEG) and how to access their config space
> (MCFG). When we do have ACPI support in the platform and the kernel,
> drivers/acpi/pci_root.c discovers all the host bridges in all domains
> via PNP0A03 or PNP0A08 devices in the ACPI namespace, and in most
> cases pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges() will do nothing.
>
> However, there *are* systems where the firmware does not expose all
> host bridges and in those cases, pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges() can be a
> problem. For example, Intel processors often have management devices
> on bus 7f or ff. If the ACPI namespace doesn't have a host bridge to
> those buses, pci_root.c won't find them, but
> pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges() *will*.

Thanks for clarifying, does it only affect bus 7f/ff, or does it
affect other busses
as well? If only management devices are affected, then I think it is
not the cause
of my issue. But thanks a lot for your detailed reply.

> This leads to several problems. Here's a dmesg sample from [1]
> (found by googling for 'dmesg log "PCI: discovered peer bus ff"'):
>
> ACPI: PCI Root Bridge [PCI0] (domain 0000 [bus 00-ff])
> PCI: Discovered peer bus fe
> pci_bus 0000:fe: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff]
> pci_bus 0000:fe: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffffff]
> pci 0000:fe:03.0: [8086:2d98] type 00 class 0x060000
> PCI: Discovered peer bus ff
> pci_bus 0000:ff: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0xffff]
> pci_bus 0000:ff: root bus resource [mem 0x00000000-0xffffffffff]
> pci 0000:ff:03.0: [8086:2d98] type 00 class 0x060000
> EDAC MC1: Giving out device to module i7core_edac.c controller i7 core #1: DEV 0000:fe:03.0 (INTERRUPT)
> EDAC PCI0: Giving out device to module i7core_edac controller EDAC PCI controller: DEV 0000:fe:03.0 (POLLED)
> EDAC MC0: Giving out device to module i7core_edac.c controller i7 core #0: DEV 0000:ff:03.0 (INTERRUPT)
> EDAC PCI1: Giving out device to module i7core_edac controller EDAC PCI controller: DEV 0000:ff:03.0 (POLLED)
>
> Some of the problems are:
>
> - Firmware may have omitted the host bridges to [bus fe] and
> [bus ff] from the ACPI namespace because *it* is using those
> management devices, so EDAC blindly using them is a potential
> conflict.
>
> - pcibios_fixup_peer_bridges() only scans domain 0, so if this
> system had multiple domains, EDAC would only work on things in
> domain 0, ignoring other domains.
>
> - The PCI core can't do bus number assignment correctly for devices
> behind bridge PCI0. The firmware told us [bus 00-ff] was
> available, so the core may assign bus number fe to some deep
> switch hierarchy. But bus fe conflicts with the devices on the
> "peer bus fe". This part is a firmware bug: it should have told
> us that PCI0 leads to [bus 00-fd], not [bus 00-ff].
>
> - The PCI core can't do resource assignment correctly for devices on
> [bus fe] and [bus ff]. It has no information about what MMIO and
> I/O port are routed to those buses, so it assumes *all* memory and
> I/O ports are routed there, which is clearly incorrect. This part
> is a Linux bug; we really shouldn't be poking around for buses
> that ACPI didn't tell us about.
>
> Bjorn
>
> [1] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/attachment.cgi?id=136529

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-03 03:51    [W:0.051 / U:2.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site