On 01/26/2013 12:33 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 2:02 AM, Yijing Wang <wangyijing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 2013/1/25 6:45, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> Hi Bjorn,
>> Thanks for your review and great work for this series patches!
>>>
>>> I applied this series on the pci/yijing-ari branch in my git tree,
>>> with the following changes:
>>>
>>> - Updated changelogs for readability
>>> - Reworked next_fn() and made it static
>>> - Updated the unconfigure/disable paths for cpcihp, sgihp, shpchp
>>> - Check PCI_SLOT for non-PCIe drivers in case a bus has several slots
>>> - Reset "Author:" to Yijing (since you wrote the original patches)
>>>
>>> Please review the changes I made and test the parts you can. I need
>>> your acknowledgement before putting these in "next" with your
>>> Signed-off-by because I changed them so much.
>>
>> I reviewed the changes and tested this series again in my hotplug machine.
>> Most of the changes looks good to me except [PATCH 3/7] PCI: Consolidate "next-function" functions.
>>
>> Currently, if parameter "dev" is passed as NULL (pci_scan_single_device() return NULL), next_fn
>> will return 0, so pci_scan_slot() will stop scanning rest function devices in this slot.
>> According to PCI 3.0 Spec "Multi-function devices require to always implement function 0
>> in the device. Implementing other functions is optional and maybe assigned in any order".
>> So we will miss some function devices when scanning pci slot. I tested this patch in my machine and found it boot failed,
>> because some usb devices can not found.
>
> Oh, right. Thanks for catching this!
>
>> +static unsigned next_fn(struct pci_bus *bus, struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned fn)
>> {
>> - u16 cap;
>> - unsigned pos, next_fn;
>> + int pos;
>> + u16 cap = 0;
>> + unsigned next_fn;
>>
>> if (!dev)
>> return 0;
>>
>> lspci info:
>> 00:16.0 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.1 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.2 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.3 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.4 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.5 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.6 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:16.7 System peripheral: Intel Corporation 5520/5500/X58 Chipset QuickData Technology Device (rev 22)
>> 00:1a.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801JI (ICH10 Family) USB UHCI Controller #4
>> 00:1a.1 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801JI (ICH10 Family) USB UHCI Controller #5
>> 00:1a.2 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801JI (ICH10 Family) USB UHCI Controller #6
>> 00:1a.7 USB Controller: Intel Corporation 82801JI (ICH10 Family) USB2 EHCI Controller #2
>>
>> I fixed this problem with [PATCH 3/7] PCI: Consolidate "next-function" functions.
>> And attach this refreshed patch at the end. This patch has been tested, and result is ok in my machine.
>
> I replaced [3/7] with yours.
>
>>> I think there are really two defects you're fixing here:
>>>
>>> (1) If you hot-remove an ARI device and replace it with a non-ARI
>>> multi-function device, we find only function 0 of the new device
>>> because the upstream bridge still has ARI enabled, and next_ari_fn()
>>> only returns function 0 for non-ARI devices. Patch [1/7] fixes this.
>>> I think this is the issue shown by your dmesg quotes above.
>>>
>>> (2) If you hot-add an ARI device, the PCI core enumerates all the
>>> functions, but pciehp only initializes functions 0-7, and other
>>> functions don't work correctly. Additionally, if you hot-remove the
>>> device, pciehp only removes functions 0-7, leaving stale pci_dev
>>> structures around. Patch [4/7] fixes this.
>>>
>>> If my understanding is correct, I'll update the commit logs to mention
>>> these scenarios explicitly.
>>
>> Yes, exactly.
>
> OK, I made these tweaks and updated my pci/yijing-ari branch.
>
> I'll merge that branch into "next" as soon as Jiang confirms that his
> Signed-off-by is still valid, given that I made significant changes
> since your first posting.
Hi Bjorn,
I'm OK with the new patch, thanks for your help to improve it.
>
> Bjorn
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
