Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-33027-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.80.249 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.80.249;
From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 14:37:32 +0200 (EET)
To: Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@just42.net>
cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>, 
    Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, 
    Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, 
    Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>, 
    Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>, 
    =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=F1ski?= <kw@linux.com>, 
    Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, 
    Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>, 
    "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, 
    LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: Solve two bridge window sizing issues
In-Reply-To: <Za2YtnwLKKeMquv6@marvin.atrad.com.au>
Message-ID: <62b66d58-7824-3650-6a73-12068a22563e@linux.intel.com>
References: <20231228165707.3447-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20240104131210.71f44d4b@imammedo.users.ipa.redhat.com> <ZZaiLOR4aO84CG2S@marvin.atrad.com.au> <ZZ+gEmxI/TxdbmyQ@marvin.atrad.com.au> <ZajJzcquyvRebAFN@marvin.atrad.com.au>
 <Za0T_siv79qz1jkk@smile.fi.intel.com> <Za2YtnwLKKeMquv6@marvin.atrad.com.au>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-707510617-1705927052=:994"

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323328-707510617-1705927052=:994
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

On Mon, 22 Jan 2024, Jonathan Woithe wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 02:54:22PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 05:18:45PM +1030, Jonathan Woithe wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 06:30:22PM +1030, Jonathan Woithe wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 10:48:53PM +1030, Jonathan Woithe wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 01:12:10PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 28 Dec 2023 18:57:00 +0200
> > > > > > Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Here's a series that contains two fixes to PCI bridge window =
sizing
> > > > > > > algorithm. Together, they should enable remove & rescan cycle=
 to work
> > > > > > > for a PCI bus that has PCI devices with optional resources an=
d/or
> > > > > > > disparity in BAR sizes.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > For the second fix, I chose to expose find_empty_resource_slo=
t() from
> > > > > > > kernel/resource.c because it should increase accuracy of the =
cannot-fit
> > > > > > > decision (currently that function is called find_resource()).=
 In order
> > > > > > > to do that sensibly, a few improvements seemed in order to ma=
ke its
> > > > > > > interface and name of the function sane before exposing it. T=
hus, the
> > > > > > > few extra patches on resource side.
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > Unfortunately I don't have a reason to suspect these would he=
lp with
> > > > > > > the issues related to the currently ongoing resource regressi=
on
> > > > > > > thread [1].
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > Jonathan,
> > > > > > can you test this series on affected machine with broken kernel=
 to see if
> > > > > > it's of any help in your case?
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Certainly, but it will have to wait until next Thursday (11 Jan 2=
024).  I'm
> > > > > still on leave this week, and when at work I only have physical a=
ccess to
> > > > > the machine concerned on Thursdays at present.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Which kernel would you prefer I apply the series to?
> > > >=20
> > > > I was very short of time today but I did apply the above series to =
the
> > > > 5.15.y branch (since I had this source available), resulting in ver=
sion
> > > > 5.15.141+.  Unfortunately, in the rush I forgot to do a clean after=
 the
> > > > bisect reset, so the resulting kernel was not correctly built.  It =
booted
> > > > but thought it was a different version and therefore none of the mo=
dules
> > > > could be found.  As a result, the test is invalid.
> > > >=20
> > > > I will try again in a week when I next have physical access to the =
system.=20
> > > > Apologies for the delay.  In the meantime, if there's a specific ke=
rnel I
> > > > should apply the patch series against please let me know.  As I und=
erstand
> > > > it, you want it applied to one of the kernels which failed, making =
5.15.y
> > > > (for y < 145) a reasonable choice.
> > >=20
> > > I did a "make clean" to reset the source tree and recompiled.  Howeve=
r, it
> > > errored out:
> > >=20
> > >   drivers/pci/setup-bus.c:988:24: error: =E2=80=98RESOURCE_SIZE_MAX=
=E2=80=99 undeclared
> > >   drivers/pci/setup-bus.c:998:17: error: =E2=80=98pci_bus_for_each_re=
source=E2=80=99 undeclared
> > >=20
> > > This was with the patch series applied against 5.15.141.  It seems th=
e patch
> > > targets a kernel that's too far removed from 5.15.x.
> > >=20
> > > Which kernel would you like me to apply the patch series to and test?
> >=20
> > The rule of thumb is to test against latest vanilla (as of today v6.7).
> > Also makes sense to test against Linux Next. The v5.15 is way too old f=
or
> > a new code.
>=20
> Thanks, and understood.  In this case the request from Igor was=20
>=20
>     can you test this series on affected machine with broken kernel to se=
e if
>     it's of any help in your case?
>=20
> The latest vanilla kernel (6.7) has (AFAIK) had the offending commit
> reverted, so it's not a "broken" kernel in this respect.  Therefore, if I=
've
> understood the request correctly, working with that kernel won't produce =
the
> desired test.

Well, you can revert the revert again to get back to the broken state.

--=20
 i.

--8323328-707510617-1705927052=:994--