public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs•ru>
To: Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux•vnet.ibm.com>,
	Wei Yang <weiyang@linux•vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: benh@kernel•crashing.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/6] powerpc/powernv: replace the hard coded boundary with gate
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2015 19:11:25 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55C4763D.6050703@ozlabs.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150806052633.GA4767@gwshan>

On 08/06/2015 03:26 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 09:25:01AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
>> Based on the limitation of M64 Window size, when VF BAR size is bigger than
>> 64MB, IOV BAR just round up power of 2 of the total_vfs. While the 64MB is
>> a magic boundary in code, which is hard to maintain.
>>
>> This patch replaces the hard coded boundary with gate, which is calculated
>>from m64_segsize and adds comment to explain the reason for it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <weiyang@linux•vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c |   22 +++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>> index f5d110c..31dcedc 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c
>> @@ -2702,7 +2702,7 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> 	struct pnv_phb *phb;
>> 	struct resource *res;
>> 	int i;
>> -	resource_size_t size;
>> +	resource_size_t size, gate;
>> 	struct pci_dn *pdn;
>> 	int mul, total_vfs;
>>
>> @@ -2718,6 +2718,17 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>
>> 	total_vfs = pci_sriov_get_totalvfs(pdev);
>> 	mul = phb->ioda.total_pe;
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If bigger than or equal to half of m64_segsize, just round up power
>> +	 * of two.
>> +	 *
>> +	 * Generally, one M64 BAR maps one IOV BAR. To avoid conflict with
>> +	 * other devices, IOV BAR size is expanded to be (total_pe * VF size).
>> +	 * When VF size is half of m64_segsize , the expanded size would equal
>> +	 * to half of the whole M64 Window size, which will exhaust the M64
>> +	 * Window and limit the system flexibility.
>> +	 */
>
> s/VF size/VF BAR size
> s/m64_segsize/M64 segment size
> s/M64 Window/M64 space

I thought I started understanding the stuff and you just introduces new 
term - "M64 space". Not "64bit MMIO space" but "M64 space" - what is this? 
Is that 64GB 64bit MMIO window which we get from the hostboot?


>
>> +	gate = phb->ioda.m64_segsize >> 1;
>>
>> 	for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>> 		res = &pdev->resource[i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES];
>> @@ -2732,10 +2743,11 @@ static void pnv_pci_ioda_fixup_iov_resources(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>
>> 		size = pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, i + PCI_IOV_RESOURCES);
>>
>> -		/* bigger than 64M */
>> -		if (size > (1 << 26)) {
>> -			dev_info(&pdev->dev, "PowerNV: VF BAR%d: %pR IOV size is bigger than 64M, roundup power2\n",
>> -				 i, res);
>> +		/* bigger than or equal to gate */
>> +		if (size >= gate) {
>> +			dev_info(&pdev->dev, "PowerNV: VF BAR%d: %pR IOV size "
>> +				"is bigger than %lld, roundup power2\n",
>> +				 i, res, gate);
>
> If I understand the changes correctly, single VF BAR size is still checked against
> the "gate" (128MB), not the total VF BAR size. Recap the comments I gave last time:
>
> I mean to check the sum of all VF BARs. For example, the VFs attached to its PF has two
> VF BARs and each of them is 64MB. For this case, the MMIO resource can't be allocated
> once extending them to 256 VFs. So we have to try "single-pe-mode" for this situation.
> So the check becomes as below:
>
>          struct pci_controller *hose = pci_bus_to_host(pdev->bus);
>          struct pnv_phb *phb = hose->private_data;
>          resource_size_t total_vf_bar_sz = 0;
>          resource_size_t gate;
>
>          /* Some comments to explain the "gate" */
>          gate = phb->m64_segsize / 2;
>          for (i = 0; i < PCI_SRIOV_NUM_BARS; i++) {
>                  total_vf_bar_sz += pci_iov_resource_size(pdev, PCI_IOV_RESOURCES + i);
>
>          if (total_vf_bar_sz >= gate)


Why would be compare to the total size of the BARs? If VFs have 3 64MB BARs 
each (these are 64bit BARs so up to 3 per VF, right?), which is 192MB in 
total per VF, we can use 3 M64's, each in segmented mode (1 segment == 
64MB) and cover many VFs.



>                  /* single-pe-mode */
>          else
>                  /* shared-mode */
>
>> 			mul = roundup_pow_of_two(total_vfs);
>> 			pdn->m64_single_mode = true;
>> 			break;
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
>


-- 
Alexey

  reply	other threads:[~2015-08-07  9:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-07-29  7:22 [PATCH] powerpc/powernv: use one M64 BAR in Single PE mode for one VF BAR Wei Yang
2015-07-30  1:15 ` Gavin Shan
2015-07-30  5:43   ` Wei Yang
2015-07-31  0:13     ` Gavin Shan
2015-07-31  2:01       ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05  1:24         ` [PATCH V2 0/6] Redesign SR-IOV on PowerNV Wei Yang
2015-08-05  1:24           ` [PATCH V2 1/6] powerpc/powernv: don't enable SRIOV when VF BAR contains non M64 BAR Wei Yang
2015-08-06  4:35             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06  6:10               ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06  6:57                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06  7:47                   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 11:07                     ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 14:13                     ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  1:24                       ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 14:10               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  1:20                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  2:24                   ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  3:50                     ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  7:14                     ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-10  1:40                       ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05  1:24           ` [PATCH V2 2/6] powerpc/powernv: simplify the calculation of iov resource Wei Yang
2015-08-06  4:51             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06  9:00               ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06  9:41                 ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 10:15                   ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-07  1:36                     ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 13:49               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  1:08                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-05  1:25           ` [PATCH V2 3/6] powerpc/powernv: use one M64 BAR in Single PE mode for one VF BAR Wei Yang
2015-08-06  5:20             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06  9:36               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-06 10:07                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  1:48                   ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  8:13                     ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-06 10:04             ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-07  2:01               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  8:59                 ` Alexey Kardashevskiy
2015-08-10  1:48                   ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05  1:25           ` [PATCH V2 4/6] powerpc/powernv: replace the hard coded boundary with gate Wei Yang
2015-08-06  5:26             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  9:11               ` Alexey Kardashevskiy [this message]
2015-08-05  1:25           ` [PATCH V2 5/6] powerpc/powernv: boundary the total vf bar size instead of the individual one Wei Yang
2015-08-06  5:28             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 14:03               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  1:23                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  2:25                   ` Wei Yang
2015-08-05  1:25           ` [PATCH V2 6/6] powerpc/powernv: allocate discrete PE# when using M64 BAR in Single PE mode Wei Yang
2015-08-06  5:36             ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-06 13:41               ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  1:36                 ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  2:33                   ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  3:43                     ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  5:44                       ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07  5:54                         ` Gavin Shan
2015-08-07  6:25                           ` Wei Yang
2015-08-07 10:00                           ` Alexey Kardashevskiy

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=55C4763D.6050703@ozlabs.ru \
    --to=aik@ozlabs$(echo .)ru \
    --cc=benh@kernel$(echo .)crashing.org \
    --cc=gwshan@linux$(echo .)vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    --cc=weiyang@linux$(echo .)vnet.ibm.com \
    /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