public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Radensky <felix@embedded-sol•com>
To: Kenji Kaneshige <kaneshige.kenji@jp•fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger•kernel.org, Alex Chiang <achiang@hp•com>,
	"linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org" <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org>
Subject: Re: Problem with PCI bus rescan on 460EX
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:09:05 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B9DCF01.4050709@embedded-sol.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B9DC820.2060100@jp.fujitsu.com>

Hello Kenji-san,

Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
> Felix Radensky wrote:
>> Hello Kenji-san,
>>
>> Kenji Kaneshige wrote:
>>> I'm not sure, but I guess pci_setup_bridge() didn't update IO 
>>> base/limit
>>> and Mem base/limit of the bridge (0000:00:02.0) because of the 
>>> following
>>> lines.
>>>
>>> static void pci_setup_bridge(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>> {
>>>        struct pci_dev *bridge = bus->self;
>>>        struct resource *res;
>>>        struct pci_bus_region region;
>>>        u32 l, bu, lu, io_upper16;
>>>
>>>        if (pci_is_enabled(bridge))    
>>> <===============================                              
>>> return;            <===============================
>>>
>>>        dev_info(&bridge->dev, "PCI bridge to [bus %02x-%02x]\n",
>>>                 bus->secondary, bus->subordinate);
>>>     ...
>>>
>>> It seems the bridge was already enabled by 
>>> pci_assign_unassigned_resources()
>>> at boot time. Does removing those lines make any change?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, with these lines removed bridge memory window is properly 
>> allocated.
>
> These lines are to prevent updating IO or memory windows when there are
> some devices working behind the bridge. So please note that removing
> these lines is just for debugging.
>
>
>> For some reason bridge memory is disabled, but if I enable it via 
>> setpci, and
>> also enable device memory, then everything works fine. If the system 
>> is booted
>> when device behind the bridge is plugged in, bridge memory is enabled.
>>
>
> Maybe because of the following lines, I guess.
>
> void pci_enable_bridges(struct pci_bus *bus)
> {
>        struct pci_dev *dev;
>        int retval;
>
>        list_for_each_entry(dev, &bus->devices, bus_list) {
>                if (dev->subordinate) {
>                        if (!pci_is_enabled(dev)) {        <=======
>                                retval = pci_enable_device(dev);<=======
>                                pci_set_master(dev);        <=======
>                        }
>         ...
>
>

Yes, but removing this check is not enough. The bridge is enabled after 
first scan, but it's
memory is disabled. So simply calling  pci_enable_device() will not 
help, it will return without
enabling memory. I had to call  pci_disable_device() before 
pci_enable_device() to make things
work.
> One possible cause is that pcibios_enable_device() for the bridge didn't
> return any error even though it didn't work properly (ex. cannot access
> to the command register, and so on) on your platform when there is no
> device behind the bridge. But it is just my guess.
Should pcibios_enable_device() return an error if it fails to enable 
bridge memory ?

Thanks.

Felix.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-03-15  6:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <4B8E6FA3.70503@embedded-sol.com>
     [not found] ` <20100310225100.GB27324@ldl.fc.hp.com>
2010-03-11  7:45   ` Problem with PCI bus rescan on 460EX Felix Radensky
2010-03-11 20:32     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-11 21:41       ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-11 21:49         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-11  7:50   ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-12  9:22     ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-12 23:04       ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-15  5:39         ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-15  5:46           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-15  5:54             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-15  6:09           ` Felix Radensky [this message]
2010-03-15  9:00             ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-15 11:23               ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-16  5:40                 ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-16  8:39                   ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-16 21:40                   ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-17  1:03                     ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-17  7:38                       ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-17  7:47                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-17  7:57                           ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-17 23:04                             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-18  0:09                             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-28  9:13                       ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-28  9:56                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2010-03-28 13:07                           ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-29  0:05                         ` Yinghai Lu
2010-03-29  7:01                           ` Kenji Kaneshige
2010-03-29  7:35                             ` Felix Radensky
2010-03-02 13:27 Felix Radensky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4B9DCF01.4050709@embedded-sol.com \
    --to=felix@embedded-sol$(echo .)com \
    --cc=achiang@hp$(echo .)com \
    --cc=kaneshige.kenji@jp$(echo .)fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox