On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 02:42:01PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 10:01:19 -0500 > Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 10:18:58PM +0900, Takashi Sakamoto wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2024 at 09:41:49AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > So even without this patch, you are able to pass the FW643 to a VM > > > > with VFIO, and you don't see any issues caused by VFIO resetting the > > > > device? > > > > > > Absolutely yes, at least in my VM, for recent years to maintain Linux > > > FireWire subsystem and ALSA firewire stack. > > > > So there must be something different between your system and Edmund's. > > Maybe we can refine the quirk so it avoids the SBR on Edmund's system > > but not yours. > > > > Can you both collect the output of "sudo lspci -vvv" so we can try to > > figure out the difference? Also a complete dmesg log would be helpful > > and would contain DMI information that we might need if this is > > firmware dependent. > > The original patch proposed for this gave me the impression that this > was a device used on various old Mac systems, not likely applicable to > a general purpose plug-in card. Given the expanded use case, I'd > suggest reverting the patch. Makes sense, I'll queue up a revert for v6.9 so we can take some time to figure this out. > I think we need significantly more exhaustive testing on the afflicted > system to understand whether this is an issue with the endpoint, the > root port, the BIOS, etc. > > In the meantime, or maybe as a permanent solution, Edmund can make use > of the reset_method interface in pci-syfs to restrict the available > reset methods for the device rather than risk removing a reset > mechanism identified as working by other users. My 2 cents. Thanks, > > Alex >
