Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp4561623pxj; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:42:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxcn/R8nhbHzR0pLT4GDmfOAT8oEu2VSCV2+zMPzZQDHwXr/GIK6l3mX2FiNK+Ajn2lDJJX X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:10c7:: with SMTP id rv7mr29685717ejb.125.1621964552984; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:42:32 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1621964552; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=1GO6bEKVfuc1Zg2vyCQDjmCgUoAct6XzDzwtXNVJ1Pzv1+iHVMvbNqs4GGFVbTxHfK hCKww3dOz9Q2W6n+sZr5T6dBuaqRIqIdBwj5FG1gQY5f9xDpQi+8ik1b9ud/Cw0QS/iJ sI5q1Lc61r9RYi/UAdZbS/ZQTmrcLMDUfG0yMldx1TotDTkJW01dXoq2eLpPUBnIF3cJ KFGDJBXqISoKh5PtDVq1fpg5+RZe+i1Ys1i/d5oB1n/I26AUST9krRkkfaHmZhhr9CAR WuM2cjqJEbSHdZSPoyK8gVMIge+GSxt5KcP1Sa6vZ+z4LehYndGD4zKuf0iJ922xw0E/ yKWw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject :message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :dkim-signature; bh=UmPOKrMt5LNOzTOPYHy0rNZ6XSp9SByxybtHjFRznmE=; b=m8emSl+pKbU5aIpkZDf6HsBk4HyI1/Ojw6Mj3N/ovQcIglkZaOjUl0Yh+QKNsD0+oD UQ9QFK3mtpqIwoF1uMAr7hv2o/wVFNm4s+EZ53qggKWAt4LS4+OEXkne/n7wO2neiy2T hARP9Ru3VUzMVPjFlOiQEn76gkxnlTArMayMgRya0njF2dc/F3neHbmeY6vMty3ou99y zxRc5eEp7Qd7Oj2pF0vwoh6Jv3XcCe0X6qWVTg4vBEdlQT5sJtpR4Fq5MLmthqd5LvIm 0/S83FAdIWI37TiS5CP9gjWVO5bKsopawbLh68RSq3nXFPgeyOi+KGYJshO8I4D88JOH Vxlw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=djC9Uxu2; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h8si16124514edb.587.2021.05.25.10.42.09; Tue, 25 May 2021 10:42:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=djC9Uxu2; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232006AbhEYP4j (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 25 May 2021 11:56:39 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:36556 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231918AbhEYP4j (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 May 2021 11:56:39 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47A1D613F4; Tue, 25 May 2021 15:55:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1621958109; bh=rbfLFTpdS7dsvU1lnqHm0Eg6YbPN1ywTyypZbgz6f4Y=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=djC9Uxu2huIeUKtbihW1gQMB+QtaskgQTF2B/wDluYf7tuCI2Ix59oD5g8hjHXj7V YxuD3VGGmNHk/025H8A4ZgiMKwHV7C3Q6c+ynlOL/EcJmbUqDINlrtZbj62OrDe1Tm daH0BkwRg0L0zBfgEZW77VghYr+g7L6yFWbzdnaATDh+J9yzfSVhV7r/Mkpsjk3OZ6 zSL1yVko44rOOzi1g9Ps58cE3yqm+e7/1mEGy2oauEeLZetQTvzR28GeALvBrhFp31 NqFhkAR9mf7YEW/D9k9VEU73RRr1NmjEAQTmSV9TWJU2e6UErfHlB5DFgXA+hrdhHL PA0Qp/gaGtw/A== Received: by mail-oi1-f176.google.com with SMTP id c196so22525333oib.9; Tue, 25 May 2021 08:55:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ILc432lbHwxWiIIsSilJGEq67qh4wq/sMAtH7CIJO3KZjn1w3 fdlqSFi41M3rlv5217eox9SS6su9ZLQw1rvkahQ= X-Received: by 2002:aca:3182:: with SMTP id x124mr3327594oix.47.1621958108589; Tue, 25 May 2021 08:55:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7a1e2ebc-f7d8-8431-d844-41a9c36a8911@arm.com> <01efd004-1c50-25ca-05e4-7e4ef96232e2@arm.com> <87eedxbtkn.fsf@stealth> <877djnaq11.fsf@stealth> In-Reply-To: From: Ard Biesheuvel Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 17:54:56 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [BUG] rockpro64: PCI BAR reassignment broken by commit 9d57e61bf723 ("of/pci: Add IORESOURCE_MEM_64 to resource flags for 64-bit memory addresses") To: Peter Geis Cc: Punit Agrawal , Robin Murphy , Alexandru Elisei , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , arm-mail-list , Heiko Stuebner , Leonardo Bras , Rob Herring , PCI , =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=C3=B6nig?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 17:34, Peter Geis wrote: > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 9:57 AM Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > On Tue, 25 May 2021 at 15:42, Punit Agrawal wr= ote: > > > > > > Hi Ard, > > > > > > Ard Biesheuvel writes: > > > > > > > On Sun, 23 May 2021 at 13:06, Punit Agrawal wrote: > > > >> > > > >> Robin Murphy writes: > > > >> > > > >> > [ +linux-pci for visibility ] > > > >> > > > > >> > On 2021-05-18 10:09, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > > > >> >> After doing a git bisect I was able to trace the following erro= r when booting my > > > >> >> rockpro64 v2 (rk3399 SoC) with a PCIE NVME expansion card: > > > >> >> [..] > > > >> >> [ 0.305183] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: host bridge /pcie@f= 8000000 ranges: > > > >> >> [ 0.305248] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: MEM 0x00fa0000= 00..0x00fbdfffff -> > > > >> >> 0x00fa000000 > > > >> >> [ 0.305285] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: IO 0x00fbe000= 00..0x00fbefffff -> > > > >> >> 0x00fbe00000 > > > >> >> [ 0.306201] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: supply vpcie1v8 not= found, using dummy > > > >> >> regulator > > > >> >> [ 0.306334] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: supply vpcie0v9 not= found, using dummy > > > >> >> regulator > > > >> >> [ 0.373705] rockchip-pcie f8000000.pcie: PCI host bridge to = bus 0000:00 > > > >> >> [ 0.373730] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [bus 00-1f] > > > >> >> [ 0.373751] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0xfa0000= 00-0xfbdfffff 64bit] > > > >> >> [ 0.373777] pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [io 0x0000-0= xfffff] (bus > > > >> >> address [0xfbe00000-0xfbefffff]) > > > >> >> [ 0.373839] pci 0000:00:00.0: [1d87:0100] type 01 class 0x06= 0400 > > > >> >> [ 0.373973] pci 0000:00:00.0: supports D1 > > > >> >> [ 0.373992] pci 0000:00:00.0: PME# supported from D0 D1 D3ho= t > > > >> >> [ 0.378518] pci 0000:00:00.0: bridge configuration invalid (= [bus 00-00]), > > > >> >> reconfiguring > > > >> >> [ 0.378765] pci 0000:01:00.0: [144d:a808] type 00 class 0x01= 0802 > > > >> >> [ 0.378869] pci 0000:01:00.0: reg 0x10: [mem 0x00000000-0x00= 003fff 64bit] > > > >> >> [ 0.379051] pci 0000:01:00.0: Max Payload Size set to 256 (w= as 128, max 256) > > > >> >> [ 0.379661] pci 0000:01:00.0: 8.000 Gb/s available PCIe band= width, limited by > > > >> >> 2.5 GT/s PCIe x4 link at 0000:00:00.0 (capable of 31.504 Gb/s w= ith 8.0 GT/s PCIe > > > >> >> x4 link) > > > >> >> [ 0.393269] pci_bus 0000:01: busn_res: [bus 01-1f] end is up= dated to 01 > > > >> >> [ 0.393311] pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 14: no space for [mem size= 0x00100000] > > > >> >> [ 0.393333] pci 0000:00:00.0: BAR 14: failed to assign [mem = size 0x00100000] > > > >> >> [ 0.393356] pci 0000:01:00.0: BAR 0: no space for [mem size = 0x00004000 64bit] > > > >> >> [ 0.393375] pci 0000:01:00.0: BAR 0: failed to assign [mem s= ize 0x00004000 64bit] > > > >> >> [ 0.393397] pci 0000:00:00.0: PCI bridge to [bus 01] > > > >> >> [ 0.393839] pcieport 0000:00:00.0: PME: Signaling with IRQ 7= 8 > > > >> >> [ 0.394165] pcieport 0000:00:00.0: AER: enabled with IRQ 78 > > > >> >> [..] > > > >> >> to the commit 9d57e61bf723 ("of/pci: Add IORESOURCE_MEM_64 to > > > >> >> resource flags for > > > >> >> 64-bit memory addresses"). > > > >> > > > > >> > FWFW, my hunch is that the host bridge advertising no 32-bit mem= ory > > > >> > resource, only only a single 64-bit non-prefetchable one (even t= hough > > > >> > it's entirely below 4GB) might be a bit weird and tripping somet= hing > > > >> > up in the resource assignment code. It certainly seems like the = thing > > > >> > most directly related to the offending commit. > > > >> > > > > >> > I'd be tempted to try fiddling with that in the DT (i.e. changin= g > > > >> > 0x83000000 to 0x82000000 in the PCIe node's "ranges" property) t= o see > > > >> > if it makes any difference. Note that even if it helps, though, = I > > > >> > don't know whether that's the correct fix or just a bodge around= a > > > >> > corner-case bug somewhere in the resource code. > > > >> > > > >> From digging into this further the failure seems to be due to a mi= smatch > > > >> of flags when allocating resources in pci_bus_alloc_from_region() = - > > > >> > > > >> if ((res->flags ^ r->flags) & type_mask) > > > >> continue; > > > >> > > > >> Though I am also not sure why the failure is only being reported o= n > > > >> RK3399 - does a single 64-bit window have anything to do with it? > > > >> > > > > > > > > The NVMe in the example exposes a single 64-bit non-prefetchable BA= R. > > > > Such BARs can not be allocated in a prefetchable host bridge window > > > > (unlike the converse, i.e., allocating a prefetchable BAR in a > > > > non-prefetchable host bridge window is fine) > > > > > > > > 64-bit non-prefetchable host bridge windows cannot be forwarded by = PCI > > > > to PCI bridges, they simply lack the BAR registers to describe them= . > > > > Therefore, non-prefetchable endpoint BARs (even 64-bit ones) need t= o > > > > be carved out of a host bridge's non-prefetchable 32-bit window if > > > > they need to pass through a bridge. > > > > > > Thank you for the explanation. I also looked at the PCI-to-PCI Bridge > > > spec to understand where some of the limitations are coming from. > > > > > > > So the error seems to be here that the host bridge's 32-bit > > > > non-prefetchable window has the 64-bit attribute set, even though i= t > > > > resides below 4 GB entirely. I suppose that the resource allocation > > > > could be made more forgiving (and it was in the past, before commit > > > > 9d57e61bf723 was applied). However, I would strongly recommend not > > > > deviating from common practice, and just describe the 32-bit > > > > addressable non-prefetchable resource window as such. > > > > > > IIUC, the host bridge's configuration (64-bit on non-prefetchable > > > window) is based on what the hardware advertises. > > > > > > > What do you mean by 'what the hardware advertises'? The host bridge is > > apparently configured to decode a 32-bit addressable window as MMIO, > > and the question is why this window has the 64-bit attribute set in > > the DT description. > > > > > Can you elaborate on what you have in mind to correct the > > > non-prefetchable resource window? Are you thinking of adding a quirk > > > somewhere to address this? > > > > > > > No. Just fix the DT. > > Good Morning, > > I believe Robin is correct that there is more to this. > While attempting to work out why dGPUs won't work with the rk356x > series PCIe controllers, Christian K=C3=B6nig from the amd-gpu driver > mailing list noticed the gpu was incorrectly allocated a 64bit > non-prefetchable BAR which should instead be a 32 non-prefetchable > BAR. > This is due to the translation. For some reason, lspci translates the BAR values to CPU addresses, but the PCI side addresses are within 32-bits. Are you sure the amdgpu driver can even deal with non-1:1 host bridges? > The ranges currently set are: > ranges =3D <0x81000000 0x0 0x00800000 0x3 0x00800000 0x0 0x00100000 > 0x82000000 0x0 0x00900000 0x3 0x00900000 0x0 0x3f700000>; > So you have two ranges here. > but the final allocation was: > > lspci -v > 00:00.0 PCI bridge: Fuzhou Rockchip Electronics Co., Ltd Device 3566 > (rev 01) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode]) > Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 96 > Bus: primary=3D00, secondary=3D01, subordinate=3Dff, sec-latency= =3D0 > I/O behind bridge: 00001000-00001fff [size=3D4K] > Memory behind bridge: 00900000-009fffff [size=3D1M] > Prefetchable memory behind bridge: > 0000000010000000-000000001fffffff [size=3D256M] But the host bridge/root port decodes two disjoint regions?? > Expansion ROM at 300a00000 [virtual] [disabled] [size=3D64K] > Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3 > Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable+ Count=3D1/32 Maskable- 64bit+ > Capabilities: [70] Express Root Port (Slot-), MSI 00 > Capabilities: [b0] MSI-X: Enable- Count=3D1 Masked- > Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting > Capabilities: [148] Secondary PCI Express > Capabilities: [160] L1 PM Substates > Capabilities: [170] Vendor Specific Information: ID=3D0002 Rev=3D= 4 > Len=3D100 > Kernel driver in use: pcieport > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. > [AMD/ATI] Turks PRO [Radeon HD 7570] (prog-if 00 [VGA controller]) > Subsystem: Dell Turks PRO [Radeon HD 7570] > Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 95 > Memory at 310000000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=3D256M] > Memory at 300900000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=3D128K] > I/O ports at 1000 [size=3D256] > Expansion ROM at 300920000 [disabled] [size=3D128K] > Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 > Capabilities: [58] Express Legacy Endpoint, MSI 00 > Capabilities: [a0] MSI: Enable- Count=3D1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ > Capabilities: [100] Vendor Specific Information: ID=3D0001 Rev=3D= 1 > Len=3D010 > Capabilities: [150] Advanced Error Reporting > Kernel driver in use: radeon > > 01:00.1 Audio device: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. [AMD/ATI] Turks > HDMI Audio [Radeon HD 6500/6600 / 6700M Series] > Subsystem: Dell Turks HDMI Audio [Radeon HD 6500/6600 / 6700M Ser= ies] > Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 98 > Memory at 300940000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=3D16K] > Capabilities: [50] Power Management version 3 > Capabilities: [58] Express Legacy Endpoint, MSI 00 > Capabilities: [a0] MSI: Enable+ Count=3D1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ > Capabilities: [100] Vendor Specific Information: ID=3D0001 Rev=3D= 1 > Len=3D010 > Capabilities: [150] Advanced Error Reporting > Kernel driver in use: snd_hda_intel > > This will obviously clobber registers during writes. I don't follow. Which writes will clobber which registers, and how is it obvious? > Also, if <0x82000000> (32 bit) is changed to <0x83000000> (64 bit), > most of the allocations for the dGPU fail due to no valid regions > available. > But wasn't the original problem that the resource window was 64-bit to begin with? Are you sure we are talking about the same problem here? > > > > > I am happy to put something together once I understand the preferred = way > > > to go about it. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Punit > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Linux-rockchip mailing list > > Linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip