On 20 January 2016 at 09:13, Ray Jui <rjui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 1/19/2016 11:02 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> >> On 20 January 2016 at 07:53, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> In OpenWrt trunk code we use iProc driver for PCIe controllers on bcma >>> bus (PCIE_IPROC_BCMA). Right now we use 4.1 kernel but we backported >>> all iProc changes. Unfortunately backporting set queued for 4.5 broke >>> bus scanning on some routers. >>> >>> Most BCM4708 / BCM4709 chipsets have 3 PCIe controllers. All known >>> routers use only first 2 of them. Even if router has 3 PCIe cards, the >>> last two cards are connected to the 2nd PCIe controller. >>> >>> So that PAXC patch broke support for routers with 3 cards, 2 of them >>> at the 2nd controller. It doesn't affect routers with just 2 cards. >>> This problem was tracked down in: >>> https://dev.openwrt.org/ticket/21393 >>> >>> I'm attaching two OpenWrt boot logs. >>> 1) r48381 >>> It contains all backported iProc changes. The log looks "nice", but >>> only one card (0000:01:00.0) was detected. >>> 2) r48382 >>> It contains "Revert "PCI: iproc: Add PAXC interface support"" patch. >>> It contains many "[Firmware Bug]: reg 0x??: invalid BAR (can't size)" >>> messages but there are all 3 cards detected: 0000:01:00.0, >>> 0001:03:00.0 and 0001:04:00.0 (see brcmfmac messages). >>> >>> Can you take a look at this problem, please? >> >> >> linux-arm-kernel@ stopped my e-mail due to its size. Sending >> compressed attachments. >> > > I'm a bit confused by these logs that you provided. Based on the log, there > seems to be 3 PCIe root complexes populated on the platform, domain > 0000:00:00.0, 0001:00:00:0, 0002:00:00:0 are the 3 root complexes. Root > complex 0002 seems to have nothing connected since it does not detect any > EP. > > Is the first card installed on root complex 0 (domain 0000), but the second > card and 3rd card are both installed on root complex 1 (domain 0001) on > different slots or something? I believe this is the case. Devices 0001:03:00.0 and 0001:04:00.0 suggest it's one bus (domain 0001) and just different slots. Please note BCM4708/BCM4709 is a SoC, there aren't physical connectors, I don't know hardware design details. > I suspect a potential issue is in this function: > > 173 static inline bool iproc_pcie_device_is_valid(struct iproc_pcie *pcie, > 174 unsigned int slot, > 175 unsigned int fn) > 176 { > 177 if (slot > 0) > 178 return false; > 179 > 180 /* PAXC can only support limited number of functions */ > 181 if (pcie->type == IPROC_PCIE_PAXC && fn >= MAX_NUM_PAXC_PF) > 182 return false; > 183 > 184 return true; > 185 } > > Compared to the original code, it's different. Can you try passing bus > number into the function as another argument and do the following check on > line 177: > > if (busnum == 0 && slot > 0) > return false; > > instead of > > if (slot > 0) > return false; I'll prepare an image and ask R8000 owner to give it a try. -- Rafał -- 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
