Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2022 20:16:31 +0100
From:   Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, Florent DELAHAYE <kernelorg@...ead.fr>,
        Konrad J Hambrick <kjhambrick@...il.com>,
        Matt Hansen <2lprbe78@...k.com>,
        Benoit Grégoire <benoitg@...us.ca>,
        Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@...look.com.au>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Werner Sembach <wse@...edocomputers.com>,
        mumblingdrunkard@...tonmail.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] PCI: Continue E820 vs host bridge window saga

Hi Bjorn,

On 12/8/22 19:57, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 04:31:12PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 12/4/22 10:13, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>> 2. I am afraid that now allowing PCI MMIO space to be allocated
>>>>> in regions marked as EfiMemoryMappedIO will cause regressions
>>>>> on some systems. Specifically when I tried something similar
>>>>> the last time I looked at this (using the BIOS date cut-off
>>>>> approach IIRC) there was a suspend/resume regression on
>>>>> a Lenovo ThinkPad X1 carbon (20A7) model:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029207
>>>>>
>>>>> Back then I came to the conclusion that the problem is that not
>>>>> avoiding the EfiMemoryMappedIO regions caused PCI MMIO space to
>>>>> be allocated in the 0xdfa00000 - 0xdfa10000 range which is
>>>>> listed in the EFI memmap as:
>>>>>
>>>>> [    0.000000] efi: mem46: [MMIO        |RUN|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |  ] range=[0x00000000dfa00000-0x00000000dfa0ffff] (0MB)
>>>>>
>>>>> And with current kernels with the extra logging added for this
>>>>> the following is logged related to this:
>>>>>
>>>>> [    0.326504] acpi PNP0A08:00: clipped [mem 0xdfa00000-0xfebfffff window] to [mem 0xdfa10000-0xfebfffff window] for e820 entry [mem 0xdceff000-0xdfa0ffff]
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe patch 1/4 of this set will make this clipping go away,
>>>>> re-introducing the suspend/resume problem.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I'm afraid you're right.  Comparing the logs at comment #31
>>>> (fails) and comment #38 (works):
>>>>
>>>>   pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0xdfa00000-0xfebfffff window]
>>>>   pci 0000:00:1c.0: BAR 14: assigned [mem 0xdfa00000-0xdfbfffff] fails
>>>>   pci 0000:00:1c.0: BAR 14: assigned [mem 0xdfb00000-0xdfcfffff] works
>>>>
>>>> Since 0xdfa00000 is included in the host bridge _CRS, but isn't
>>>> usable, my guess is this is a _CRS bug.
>>>
>>> Ack.
>>>
>>> So I was thinking to maybe limit the removal of EfiMemoryMappedIO
>>> regions from the E820 map if they are big enough to cause troubles?
>>>
>>> Looking at the EFI map MMIO regions on this Lenovo ThinkPad X1 carbon
>>> (20A7) model, they are tiny. Where as the ones which we know cause
>>> problems are huge. So maybe add a bit of heuristics to patch 1/4 based
>>> on the EfiMemoryMappedIO region size and only remove the big ones
>>> from the E820 map ?
>>>
>>> I know that adding heuristics like this always feels a bit wrong,
>>> because you end up putting a somewhat arbitrary cut off point in
>>> the code on which to toggle behavior on/off, but I think that in
>>> this case it should work nicely given how huge the EfiMemoryMappedIO
>>> regions which are actually causing problems are.
> 
> I'll post a v2 that removes only regions 256KB or larger in a minute.

Ok, may I ask why 256KB?

I see that that rules out then troublesome MMIO regions from the X1 carbon from:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029207 :
efi: mem46: [MMIO|RUN|  ] range=[0xdfa00000-0xdfa0ffff] (0MB) [64K]
which we know we need to avoid / keep reserved.

But OTOH the reservations which are causing the problems with assigning
resources to PCI devices by Linux look like this:
efi: mem50: [MMIO        |RUN|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |UC] range=[0x0000000065400000-0x00000000cfffffff] (1708MB)
which is significantly larger then 256KB.

So we could e.g. also put the cut-off point at 16MB and still
remove the above troublesome reservation from the E820 table.
Note just thinking out loud here. I have no idea if 16MB
would be better...


> 
>> Looking at the efi=debug output from:
>>
>> https://bugzilla-attachments.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1861035
>>
>> The small MMIO regions which we most honor as reserved do
>> have the "RUN" (runtime) flag set in the EFI mmap.
> 
> Just trying to follow along here, so not sure any of the following is
> relevant ...
> 
> This attachment is from
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2029207, and it shows:
> 
>   efi: mem46: [MMIO|RUN|  ] range=[0xdfa00000-0xdfa0ffff] (0MB) [64K]
>   efi: mem47: [MMIO|RUN|UC] range=[0xf80f8000-0xf80f8fff] (0MB)  [4K]
>   pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0xdfa00000-0xfebfffff window]
>   pci_bus 0000:00: root bus resource [mem 0xfed40000-0xfed4bfff window]
> 
> mem46 is included in the PNP0A08 _CRS, and Ivan has verified
> experimentally that we have to avoid it.

Ack.

> mem47 is also included in the _CRS, but I don't have a clue what it
> is.  Maybe some hidden device used by BIOS but not visible to us?

Could be, there is at least one hidden device called the P2SB on
most Intel systems.

>> But I'm afraid that the same applies to the troublesome
>> MMIO EFI regions which cause the failures to assign
>> PCI regions for devices not setup by the firmware:
>>
>> https://bugzilla-attachments.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1861407
>>
>> So that "RUN" flag is of no use.
> 
> I don't know what bug this attachment is from.

It is from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1868899
which is the ideapad slim 3 with the touchpad issue caused by the:
efi: mem50: [MMIO        |RUN|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |UC] range=[0x0000000065400000-0x00000000cfffffff] (1708MB)
reservation getting in the way of assigning resources to
the i2c-controller.

> Is the point here that you considered doing the E820 removal based on
> the EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME memory *attribute* instead of the
> EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO memory *type*?
> 
> I don't really know the details of EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO vs
> EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME, but it looks like EFI_MEMORY_RUNTIME can be
> applied to things like EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE (not MMIO space) that
> should stay in E820.

Sorry for the confusion. What I was trying to say is that I was interested
in seeing if we could use the "RUN" flag to differentiate between:

1. The big MMIO region which we want to remove from the e820 map:
   efi: mem50: [MMIO        |RUN|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   |  |  |  |UC] range=[0x0000000065400000-0x00000000cfffffff] (1708MB)

2. The small MMIO region which we want to keep to avoid the reported suspend/resume issue:
   efi: mem46: [MMIO|RUN|  ] range=[0xdfa00000-0xdfa0ffff] (0MB) [64K]

But unfortunately both have the RUN flag set so the RUN flag is
of no use to us.

Regards,

Hans

Powered by blists - more mailing lists