Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Received-SPF: None (esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  igor.druzhinin@citrix.com) identity=pra;
  client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com;
  envelope-from="igor.druzhinin@citrix.com";
  x-sender="igor.druzhinin@citrix.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of
  igor.druzhinin@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as
  permitted sender) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com;
  envelope-from="igor.druzhinin@citrix.com";
  x-sender="igor.druzhinin@citrix.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1";
  x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133
  ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4
  ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88
  ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ~all"
Received-SPF: None (esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo;
  client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com;
  envelope-from="igor.druzhinin@citrix.com";
  x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
IronPort-SDR: TBU9T7jchkQ1P6Nrhbf6mhdO6bD+/m42BsdXyRYJtPpVp/Rs3BiRhYYuEDtYOV+OYR0sXCTfV3
 i9xCXGd7TleNz75eYywzvFE9JqvxK+Avt2qtc2hWfvBvzVOcVwbohM15EKXFGzitdShIprtrJK
 tmAk/VYBahVFLE1fRtlTuyEo0c8uMtiDP/nqz4L1UD6xaERdMa1SfhX2dc8mk6jEeeANJTDgrj
 6DA51xzX8DCoggt7+BSzLGh8d/VkQVUuu8T50AI0xpZ8LYO2EMD6Fm25u46HxewvhDOFFtfsXi
 Bck=
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/pci: try to reserve MCFG areas earlier
To:     Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
CC:     <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
References: <1567556431-9809-1-git-send-email-igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
 <5054ad91-5b87-652c-873a-b31758948bd7@oracle.com>
 <e3114d56-51cd-b973-1ada-f6a60a7e99cc@citrix.com>
 <43b7da04-5c42-80d8-898b-470ee1c91ed2@oracle.com>
 <adefac87-c2b3-b67f-fb4d-d763ce920bef@citrix.com>
 <1695c88d-e5ad-1854-cdef-3cd95c812574@oracle.com>
 <4d3bf854-51de-99e4-9a40-a64c581bdd10@citrix.com>
 <bc3da154-d451-02cf-6154-5e0dc721a6e6@oracle.com>
 <c45b8786-5735-a95d-bc40-61372c326037@citrix.com>
 <43e492ff-f967-7218-65c4-d16581fabea3@oracle.com>
 <416ff4b7-3186-f61a-75fa-bcfc968f8117@citrix.com>
 <64d52960-28d5-fb23-8892-35c9d4ed9d90@suse.com>
From:   Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhinin@citrix.com>
Message-ID: <8fa50f93-bc83-3474-8bca-3437f3b47a6e@citrix.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Sep 2019 11:08:59 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <64d52960-28d5-fb23-8892-35c9d4ed9d90@suse.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 10/09/2019 10:55, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 10.09.2019 11:46, Igor Druzhinin wrote:
>> On 10/09/2019 02:47, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 9/9/19 5:48 PM, Igor Druzhinin wrote:
>>>> Actually, pci_mmcfg_late_init() that's called out of acpi_init() -
>>>> that's where MCFG areas are properly sized. 
>>>
>>> pci_mmcfg_late_init() reads the (static) MCFG, which doesn't need DSDT parsing, does it? setup_mcfg_map() OTOH does need it as it uses data from _CBA (or is it _CRS?), and I think that's why we can't parse MCFG prior to acpi_init(). So what I said above indeed won't work.
>>>
>>
>> No, it uses is_acpi_reserved() (it's called indirectly so might be well
>> hidden) to parse DSDT to find a reserved resource in it and size MCFG
>> area accordingly. setup_mcfg_map() is called for every root bus
>> discovered and indeed tries to evaluate _CBA but at this point
>> pci_mmcfg_late_init() has already finished MCFG registration for every
>> cold-plugged bus (which information is described in MCFG table) so those
>> calls are dummy.
> 
> I don't think they're strictly dummy. Even for boot time available devices
> iirc there's no strict requirement for there to be respective data in MCFG.
> Such a requirement exists only for devices which are actually needed to
> start the OS (disk or network, perhaps video or alike), or maybe even just
> its loader.
> 

This was my interpretation of 4.1.3 of "PCI Frimware specification":
"Memory mapped configuration base addresses for non-hot pluggable host
bridges must be described using MCFG table." Although, I admit that
"non-hot pluggable" might mean available at boot as well.

Igor