Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 25 Jun 2025, D Scott Phillips wrote: > >> Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > On Wed, 18 Jun 2025, D Scott Phillips wrote: >> > >> >> Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> >> >> > Resetting resource is problematic as it prevent attempting to allocate >> >> > the resource later, unless something in between restores the resource. >> >> > Similarly, if fail_head does not contain all resources that were reset, >> >> > those resource cannot be restored later. >> >> > >> >> > The entire reset/restore cycle adds complexity and leaving resources >> >> > into reseted state causes issues to other code such as for checks done >> >> > in pci_enable_resources(). Take a small step towards not resetting >> >> > resources by delaying reset until the end of resource assignment and >> >> > build failure list (fail_head) in sync with the reset to avoid leaving >> >> > behind resources that cannot be restored (for the case where the caller >> >> > provides fail_head in the first place to allow restore somewhere in the >> >> > callchain, as is not all callers pass non-NULL fail_head). >> >> > >> >> > The Expansion ROM check is temporarily left in place while building the >> >> > failure list until the upcoming change which reworks optional resource >> >> > handling. >> >> > >> >> > Ideally, whole resource reset could be removed but doing that in a big >> >> > step would make the impact non-tractable due to complexity of all >> >> > related code. >> >> > >> >> > Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> >> >> Hi Ilpo, I'm seeing a crash on arm64 at boot that I bisected to this >> >> change. I don't think it's the same as the other issues reported. I've >> >> confirmed the crash is still there after your follow up patches. The >> >> crash itself is below[1]. >> >> >> >> It looks like the problem begins when: >> >> >> >> amdgpu_device_resize_fb_bar() >> >> pci_resize_resource() >> >> pci_reassign_bridge_resources() >> >> __pci_bus_size_bridges() >> >> >> >> adds pci_hotplug_io_size to `realloc_head`. The io resource allocation >> >> has failed earlier because the root port doesn't have an io window[2]. >> >> >> >> Then with this patch, pci_reassign_bridge_resources()'s call to >> >> __pci_bridge_assign_resources() now returns the io added space for >> >> hotplug in the `failed` list where the old code dropped it and did not. >> >> >> >> That sends pci_reassign_bridge_resources() into the `cleanup:` path, >> >> where I think the cleanup code doesn't properly release the resources >> >> that were assigned by __pci_bridge_assign_resources() and there's a >> >> conflict reported in pci_claim_resource() where a restored resource is >> >> found as conflicting with itself: >> >> >> >> > pcieport 000d:00:01.0: bridge window [mem 0x340000000000-0x340017ffffff 64bit pref]: can't claim; address conflict with PCI Bus 000d:01 [mem 0x340000000000-0x340017ffffff 64bit pref] >> >> >> >> Setting `pci=hpiosize=0` avoids this crash, as does this change: >> >> >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> >> index 16d5d390599a..59ece11702da 100644 >> >> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> >> @@ -2442,7 +2442,7 @@ int pci_reassign_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *bridge, unsigned long type) >> >> LIST_HEAD(saved); >> >> LIST_HEAD(added); >> >> LIST_HEAD(failed); >> >> - unsigned int i; >> >> + unsigned int i, relevant_fails; >> >> int ret; >> >> >> >> down_read(&pci_bus_sem); >> >> @@ -2490,7 +2490,16 @@ int pci_reassign_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *bridge, unsigned long type) >> >> __pci_bridge_assign_resources(bridge, &added, &failed); >> >> BUG_ON(!list_empty(&added)); >> >> >> >> - if (!list_empty(&failed)) { >> >> + relevant_fails = 0; >> >> + list_for_each_entry(dev_res, &failed, list) { >> >> + restore_dev_resource(dev_res); >> >> + if (((dev_res->res->flags ^ type) & PCI_RES_TYPE_MASK) == 0) >> >> + relevant_fails++; >> >> + } >> >> + free_list(&failed); >> >> + >> >> + /* Cleanup if we had failures in resources of interest */ >> >> + if (relevant_fails != 0) { >> >> ret = -ENOSPC; >> >> goto cleanup; >> >> } >> >> @@ -2509,11 +2518,6 @@ int pci_reassign_bridge_resources(struct pci_dev *bridge, unsigned long type) >> >> return 0; >> >> >> >> cleanup: >> >> - /* Restore size and flags */ >> >> - list_for_each_entry(dev_res, &failed, list) >> >> - restore_dev_resource(dev_res); >> >> - free_list(&failed); >> >> - >> >> /* Revert to the old configuration */ >> >> list_for_each_entry(dev_res, &saved, list) { >> >> struct resource *res = dev_res->res; >> >> >> >> I don't know this code well enough to know if that changes is completely >> >> bonkers or what. >> > >> > Hi again, >> > >> > Thanks for all the details what you think went wrong, it was really >> > useful. I think you have it towards the right direction but a more >> > targetted seems enough to address this (this needs to be confirmed, please >> > test the patch below). >> > >> > The most correct solution would be to make all the resource fitting code >> > to focus on the resources that match the type filter. However, that looks >> > way too scary change at the moment to implement, and especially, let it >> > end up into stable (to fix this issue). So it looks this somewhat band-aid >> > solution similar to your attempt might be better as a fix for now. >> > >> > In medium term, I'd want to avoid using type as a filter and base all >> > such decisions on matching the bridge window resource the dev resource >> > belongs to. I've some work towards that direction already which removes >> > lots of complexity in which bridge window is going to be selected as >> > there will be a single place to make always the same decision. That change >> > is also going to simplify the internal interfaces between functions very >> > noticably (but the change require more testing before I've enough >> > confidence to submit it). That work doesn't cover this resize side yet but >> > it should be extended there as well. >> > >> > So please test this somewhat band-aid patch: >> > >> > From 971686ed85e341e7234f8fe8b666140187f63ad1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> > From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 20:30:43 +0300 >> > Subject: [PATCH 1/1] PCI: Fix failure detectiong during resource resize >> >> detection >> >> > MIME-Version: 1.0 >> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 >> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >> > >> > Since the commit 96336ec70264 ("PCI: Perform reset_resource() and build >> > fail list in sync") the failed list is always built and returned to let >> > the caller decide if what to do with the failures. The caller may want >> > to retry resource fitting and assignment and before that can happen, >> > the resources should be restored to their original state (a reset >> > effectively clears the struct resource), which requires returning them >> > on the failed list so that the original state remains stored in the >> > associated struct pci_dev_resource. >> > >> > Resource resizing is different from the ordinary resource fitting and >> > assignment in that it only considers part of the resources. This means >> > failures for other resource types are not relevant at all and should be >> > ignored. As resize doesn't unassign such unrelated resources, those >> > resource ending up into the failed list implies assignment of that >> > resource must have failed before resize too. The check in >> > pci_reassign_bridge_resources() to decide if the whole assignment is >> > successful, however, is based on list emptiness which may cause false >> > negatives when the failed list resources with unrelated type. >> > >> > If the failed list is not empty, call pci_required_resource_failed() >> > and extend it to be able to filter on specific resource types too (if >> > provided). >> > >> > Calling pci_required_resource_failed() at this point is slightly >> > problematic because the resource itself is reset when the failed list >> > is constructed in __assign_resources_sorted(). As a result, >> > pci_resource_is_optional() does not have access to the original >> > resource flags. This could be worked around by restoring and >> > re-reseting the resource around the call to pci_resource_is_optional(), >> > however, it shouldn't cause issue as resource resizing is meant for >> > 64-bit prefetchable resources according to Christian König (see the >> > Link which unfortunately doesn't point directly to Christian's reply >> > because lore didn't store that email at all). >> > >> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/c5d1b5d8-8669-5572-75a7-0b480f581ac1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ >> > Reported-by: D Scott Phillips <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Cc: Christian König <christian.koenig@xxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > drivers/pci/setup-bus.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++-------- >> > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> > index 07c3d021a47e..8284bbdc44b4 100644 >> > --- a/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> > +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-bus.c >> > @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ >> > #include <linux/acpi.h> >> > #include "pci.h" >> > >> > +#define PCI_RES_TYPE_MASK \ >> > + (IORESOURCE_IO | IORESOURCE_MEM | IORESOURCE_PREFETCH |\ >> > + IORESOURCE_MEM_64) >> > + >> > unsigned int pci_flags; >> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_flags); >> > >> > @@ -384,13 +388,19 @@ static bool pci_need_to_release(unsigned long mask, struct resource *res) >> > } >> > >> > /* Return: @true if assignment of a required resource failed. */ >> > -static bool pci_required_resource_failed(struct list_head *fail_head) >> > +static bool pci_required_resource_failed(struct list_head *fail_head, >> > + unsigned long type) >> > { >> > struct pci_dev_resource *fail_res; >> > >> > + type &= ~PCI_RES_TYPE_MASK; >> >> Is this meant to be `type &= PCI_RES_TYPE_MASK`? If not, then I think >> the new `if` check below is effectively just `if (type)`. > > Yes, it should have been without that ~. Can you test the change with > that changed? I'm sorry about the extra trouble. Hi Ilpo, no trouble at all, and thanks for your effort in fixing this case. With that change to ~, the patch keeps working for my case. Tested-by: D Scott Phillips <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: D Scott Phillips <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>