[+linux-acpi, Rafael, James, Tony, Borislav]
On Wed, Sep 08, 2021 at 03:02:53PM +0800, Xuesong Chen wrote:
> ECAM configuration memory space is reserved during the initializaion of the
> kernel, but sometimes the apei needs to access the GAS address within the
> ECAM space, thus the request_mem_region(...) will be failed in this case,
> the error message looks like:
> ...
> APEI: Can not request [mem 0x50100000-0x50100003] for APEI EINJ Trigger registers
> ...
>
> This patch provides an arm64 specific filter function to remove the GAS address
> range from the reserved ECAM resource regions, which will make the apei's GAS
> address can pass the check while not affecting the original reserved ECAM area.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xuesong Chen <xuesong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Steve Capper <steve.capper@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index 1006ed2..6096165 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -19,6 +19,13 @@
> #include <linux/slab.h>
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +struct pci_mcfg_res_region {
> + struct list_head list;
> + struct resource res;
> +};
> +
> +static LIST_HEAD(pci_mcfg_res_list);
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(pci_mcfg_lock);
> /*
> * Try to assign the IRQ number when probing a new device
> */
> @@ -107,6 +114,58 @@ static int pci_acpi_root_prepare_resources(struct acpi_pci_root_info *ci)
> return status;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI
> +extern int (*arch_apei_filter_addr)(int (*func)(__u64 start, __u64 size,
> + void *data), void *data);
> +
> +static int pci_mcfg_for_each_region(int (*func)(__u64 start, __u64 size,
> + void *data), void *data)
> +{
> + struct pci_mcfg_res_region *e;
> + int rc = 0;
> +
> + if (list_empty(&pci_mcfg_res_list))
> + return 0;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(e, &pci_mcfg_res_list, list) {
> + rc = func(e->res.start, resource_size(&e->res), data);
> + if (rc)
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#define set_apei_filter() \
> + do { \
> + if (!arch_apei_filter_addr) \
> + arch_apei_filter_addr = pci_mcfg_for_each_region; \
> + } while (0)
> +#else
> +#define set_apei_filter()
> +#endif
> +
> +static int pci_mcfg_res_add(struct resource *res)
> +{
> + struct pci_mcfg_res_region *new;
> +
> + if (!res)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + new = kzalloc(sizeof(*new), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!new)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + new->res.start = res->start;
> + new->res.end = res->end;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&pci_mcfg_lock);
> + list_add(&new->list, &pci_mcfg_res_list);
> + mutex_unlock(&pci_mcfg_lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Lookup the bus range for the domain in MCFG, and set up config space
> * mapping.
> @@ -144,6 +203,11 @@ static int pci_acpi_root_prepare_resources(struct acpi_pci_root_info *ci)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> + /* insert the mcfg resource region of current segment into the list */
> + ret = pci_mcfg_res_add(&cfgres);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_warn(dev, "add %pR into the mcfg res list failed\n", &cfgres);
> +
> return cfg;
> }
>
> @@ -204,6 +268,8 @@ struct pci_bus *pci_acpi_scan_root(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
> list_for_each_entry(child, &bus->children, node)
> pcie_bus_configure_settings(child);
>
> + set_apei_filter();
> +
> return bus;
> }
This is an x86 code copy and paste. IIUC, the "arch" resources filtering
(that isn't arch specific at all) was introduced in:
commit d91525eb8ee6 ("ACPI, EINJ: Enhance error injection tolerance
level")
I don't believe though that there is anything arch specific in the
apei_get_arch_resources() implementation, after all what x86 does
is filtering out MCFG regions, with the arch_apei_filter_add(*) that
is not arch specific anyway (ie pci_mmcfg_for_each_region() on x86).
Should we take this opportunity to remove the arch hooks and just
filter out MCFG resources directly in APEI code (because that's what
the arch specific hook does _anyway_) ?
I see no reason to duplicate this for arm64, please let me know
if I am missing something.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
