linux-kernel - Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070311112400.GB24475@mellanox.co.il>
Date:	Sun, 11 Mar 2007 13:24:00 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-pm@...ts.osdl.org,
	Michal Piotrowski <michal.k.k.piotrowski@...il.com>
Subject: Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning

> Quoting Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>:
> Subject: Re: SATA resume slowness, e1000 MSI warning
> 
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...lanox.co.il> writes:
> 
> >> The only case I can see which might trigger this is if we saved
> >> pci-X state and then didn't restore it because we could not find
> >> the capability on restore.
> >
> > Hmm. pci_save_pcix_state/pci_restore_pcix_state seem to only handle
> > regular devices and seem to ignore the fact that for bridge PCI-X
> > capability has a different structure.
> >
> > Is this intentional? 
> 
> Probably not a such.  I don't think we have any drivers for bridge
> devices so I don't think it matters.  It likely wouldn't hurt to fix
> it just in case though.
> 
> Do any of the mellanox cards do anything with the bridge on the card?

Yes but they do their own thing wrt saving/restoring registers.
Look at drivers/infiniband/hw/mthca/mthca_reset.c

> > If not, here's a patch to fix this. Warning: completely untested.
> 
> If you fix the offsets and diff this against my last fix (to never
> free the buffer) I think your patch makes sense.

Let's agree what the correct offsets are.

> > PCI: restore bridge PCI-X capability registers after PM event
> >
> > Restore PCI-X bridge up/downstream capability registers
> > after PM event.  This includes maxumum split transaction
> > commitment limit which might be vital for PCI X.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...lanox.co.il>
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > index df49530..4b788ef 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> > @@ -597,14 +597,19 @@ static int pci_save_pcix_state(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >  	if (pos <= 0)
> >  		return 0;
> >  
> > -	save_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*save_state) + sizeof(u16), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + save_state = kzalloc(sizeof(*save_state) + sizeof(u16) * 2, GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	if (!save_state) {
> > -		dev_err(&dev->dev, "Out of memory in pci_save_pcie_state\n");
> > +		dev_err(&dev->dev, "Out of memory in pci_save_pcix_state\n");
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >  	}
> >  	cap = (u16 *)&save_state->data[0];
> >  
> > -	pci_read_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_CMD, &cap[i++]);
> > +	if (dev->hdr_type == PCI_HEADER_TYPE_BRIDGE) {
> 
> This appears to be the proper test.
> 
> > + pci_read_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_BRIDGE_UP_SPL_CTL, &cap[i++]);
> > + pci_read_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_BRIDGE_DN_SPL_CTL, &cap[i++]);
> > +	} else
> > +		pci_read_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_CMD, &cap[i++]);
> > +
> >  	pci_add_saved_cap(dev, save_state);
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> > @@ -621,7 +626,11 @@ static void pci_restore_pcix_state(struct pci_dev *dev)
> >  		return;
> >  	cap = (u16 *)&save_state->data[0];
> >  
> > -	pci_write_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_CMD, cap[i++]);
> > +	if (dev->hdr_type == PCI_HEADER_TYPE_BRIDGE) {
> > + pci_write_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_BRIDGE_UP_SPL_CTL, cap[i++]);
> > + pci_write_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_BRIDGE_DN_SPL_CTL, cap[i++]);
> 
> These look like the proper two registers to save.
> 
> > +	} else
> > +		pci_write_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_X_CMD, cap[i++]);
> >  	pci_remove_saved_cap(save_state);
> >  	kfree(save_state);
> >  }
> > diff --git a/include/linux/pci_regs.h b/include/linux/pci_regs.h
> > index f09cce2..fb7eefd 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/pci_regs.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pci_regs.h
> > @@ -332,6 +332,8 @@
> >  #define PCI_X_STATUS_SPL_ERR 0x20000000 /* Rcvd Split Completion Error Msg */
> >  #define  PCI_X_STATUS_266MHZ	0x40000000	/* 266 MHz capable */
> >  #define  PCI_X_STATUS_533MHZ	0x80000000	/* 533 MHz capable */
> > +#define PCI_X_BRIDGE_UP_SPL_CTL 10 /* PCI-X upstream split transaction limit */
> > +#define PCI_X_BRIDGE_DN_SPL_CTL 14 /* PCI-X downstream split transaction limit */
> 
> Unless I am completely misreading the spec. While you have picked the
> right register to save the offsets should be 0x08 and 0x0c or 8 and 12....

No, the spec is written in terms of dwords (32 bit), we are storing words (16 bits).
The data at offsets 8 and 12 is read-only split transaction capacity.
Split transaction limit starts at bit 16 so you need to add 2 to byte offset.

Right?


-- 
MST
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/