On Thu, 2014-01-02 at 13:01 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > On 01/02/2014 11:36 AM, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 16:13 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > >> On 12/29/2013 08:16 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > >>> On Sat, 2013-12-28 at 23:32 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > >>>> On 12/28/2013 7:23 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 2013-12-28 at 18:31 -0800, Dana Goyette wrote: > >>>>>> I have purchased both a SuperMicro X10SAE and an X10SAT, and I need to > >>>>>> soon decide which one to keep. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The SuperMicro X10SAT has all the PCIe x1 slots hidden behind a PLX > >>>>>> PEX8066 switch, which claims to support ACS. I'd expect the devices > >>>>>> downstream of the PLX switch to be in separate groups. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> With Linux 3.13-rc5 and "enable overrides for missing ACS capabilities" > >>>>>> applied and set for the Intel root ports, the devices behind the switch > >>>>>> remain stuck in the same group. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In terms of passing devices to different VMs, which is better: all > >>>>>> devices on different root ports, or all devices behind the one > >>>>>> ACS-supporting switch? > >>>>> > >>>>> Can you provide lspci -vvv info? If you're getting that for groups > >>>>> either the switch has ACS capabilities, but doesn't support the features > >>>>> we need or we're doing something wrong. Thanks, > >>>>> > >>>> I initially tried attaching the output as a .txt file, but it's too > >>>> large. Anyway, here's the output of lspci -nnvvv (you may notice that I > >>>> moved the Radeon to a different slot). > >>> > >>> Well, something seems amiss since the downstream switch ports all seem > >>> to support and enable the correct set of ACS capabilities. I'm tending > >>> to suspect something wrong with the ACS override patch or how it's being > >>> used since your IOMMU group is still based at the root port. Each root > >>> port is isolated from the other root ports though, so something is > >>> happening with the override patch. Can you provide the kernel command > >>> line you use to enable ACS overrides and the override patch you're > >>> using, as it applies to 3.13-rc5? Thanks, > >>> > >>> Alex > >>> > >>> -- > >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in > >>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >>> > >> I'm using the original acs-override patch from this post: > >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/30/513 > >> > >> Kernel parameter is: > >> pcie_acs_override=id:8086:8c10,id:8086:8c12,id:8086:8c16,id:8086:8c18 > >> > >> When booting a kernel without the override patch, the following devices > >> are all in the same group: Intel Root Ports 1, 2, 4, 5; ASMedia SATA > >> controller; PLX PEX8606 switch; Renesas USB controller; TI Firewire > >> controller; Intel I210 Ethernet controller. > > > > Ok, here's my shot in the dark; we must be detecting something about the > > upstream switch port to make it fail the ACS test and the only thing I > > can find that might do this is if the PCI config header on the upstream > > switch reported itself as a multifunction device. Multifunction > > upstream switch ports do need ACS capabilities to make sure that traffic > > isn't routed back through other functions. Single function devices do > > not. To test that theory, please provide 'lspci -vxs 4:00.0'. We're > > looking to see whether the byte at 0xe has the MSB set. If it does, it > > lies that it's a multifunction device. If it doesn't I'll have to get > > the dart board back out. > > > > FWIW, you should be able to work around this by adding id:10b5:8606 to > > your list of overrides. Long term, if this is the problem, we'll want > > to add a quirk to sanitize the multifunction device flag. Thanks, > > > > Alex > > > > 04:00.0 is the ASMedia SATA controller; I'll assume you meant the > upstream port of the PLX switch. Yes, it was 04:00.0 in the previous lspci listing. > 05:00.0 PCI bridge: PLX Technology, Inc. PEX 8606 6 Lane, 6 Port PCI > Express Gen 2 (5.0 GT/s) Switch (rev ba) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode]) > Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0 > Memory at eeb00000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] > Bus: primary=05, secondary=06, subordinate=0c, sec-latency=0 > Memory behind bridge: ee800000-eeafffff > Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3 > Capabilities: [48] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/4 Maskable+ 64bit+ > Capabilities: [68] Express Upstream Port, MSI 00 > Capabilities: [a4] Subsystem: PLX Technology, Inc. PEX 8606 6 Lane, 6 > Port PCI Express Gen 2 (5.0 GT/s) Switch > Capabilities: [100] Device Serial Number ba-86-01-10-b5-df-0e-00 > Capabilities: [fb4] Advanced Error Reporting > Capabilities: [138] Power Budgeting <?> > Capabilities: [148] Virtual Channel > Capabilities: [448] Vendor Specific Information: ID=0000 Rev=0 Len=0cc <?> > Capabilities: [950] Vendor Specific Information: ID=0001 Rev=0 Len=010 <?> > Kernel driver in use: pcieport > 00: b5 10 06 86 47 05 10 40 ba 00 04 06 10 00 01 00 Well, that wasn't it. I'll keep looking and probably send you a patch to figure out what's going wrong. Thanks, Alex -- 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
