On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 09:44:57PM -0700, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2016 01:33:58 +0530
> Manish Jaggi <mjaggi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Cavium devices matching this quirk do not perform
> > peer-to-peer with other functions, allowing masking out
> > these bits as if they were unimplemented in the ACS capability.
> >
> > Acked-by: Tirumalesh Chalamarla <tchalamarla@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Manish Jaggi <mjaggi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/quirks.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/quirks.c b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > index 7e32730..a300fa6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/quirks.c
> > @@ -3814,6 +3814,19 @@ static int pci_quirk_amd_sb_acs(struct pci_dev *dev, u16 acs_flags)
> > #endif
> > }
> >
> > +static int pci_quirk_cavium_acs(struct pci_dev *dev, u16 acs_flags)
> > +{
> > + /*
> > + * Cavium devices matching this quirk do not perform
> > + * peer-to-peer with other functions, allowing masking out
> > + * these bits as if they were unimplemented in the ACS capability.
> > + */
> > + acs_flags &= ~(PCI_ACS_SV | PCI_ACS_TB | PCI_ACS_RR |
> > + PCI_ACS_CR | PCI_ACS_UF | PCI_ACS_DT);
> > +
> > + return acs_flags ? 0 : 1;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Many Intel PCH root ports do provide ACS-like features to disable peer
> > * transactions and validate bus numbers in requests, but do not provide an
> > @@ -3966,6 +3979,8 @@ static const struct pci_dev_acs_enabled {
> > { PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_ANY_ID, pci_quirk_intel_pch_acs },
> > { 0x19a2, 0x710, pci_quirk_mf_endpoint_acs }, /* Emulex BE3-R */
> > { 0x10df, 0x720, pci_quirk_mf_endpoint_acs }, /* Emulex Skyhawk-R */
> > + /* Cavium ThunderX */
> > + { PCI_VENDOR_ID_CAVIUM, PCI_ANY_ID, pci_quirk_cavium_acs },
> > { 0 }
> > };
> >
>
> Apologies for not catching this, but what sort of crystal ball do you
> have that can predict not only current devices, but future devices will
> not support peer-to-peer features? Is there an internal design
> guidelines reference specification for Cavium that we can realistically
> expect this to remain consistent, or is this just an attempt to never
> think about ACS again at the customer's peril? What about the existing
> non-ThunderX products with Cavium vendor ID, does this really apply to
> those? I would strongly suggest taking the device ID into account.
> See examples like the pci_quirk_intel_pch_acs quirk where the initial
> filter is PCI_ANY_ID, but specific device types and ranges of device
> IDs are identified by the function for evaluation. This seems reckless
> to me and I'd advise that it be reverted. Thanks,
I'd be happy to revert this, but it would be easier if somebody sent a
patch and a changelog.
