Hey John,
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 10:30 AM John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 2/14/24 8:42 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 9:08 AM John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2/12/24 5:57 PM, Mark Millard wrote:
> >>> On Feb 12, 2024, at 16:36, Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Feb 12, 2024, at 16:10, Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 12, 2024, at 12:00, Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> [Gack: I was looking at the wrong vintage of source code, predating
> >>>>>> your changes: wrong system used.]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Feb 12, 2024, at 10:41, Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2024, at 09:32, John Baldwin <j...@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2/9/24 8:13 PM, Mark Millard wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Summary:
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: <BCM2838-compatible PCI-express controller> mem
> >> 0x7d500000-0x7d50930f irq 80,81 on simplebus2
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: parsing FDT for ECAM0:
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: PCI addr: 0xc0000000, CPU addr: 0x600000000, Size:
> >> 0x40000000
> >>>>>>>>> . . .
> >>>>>>>>> rman_manage_region: <pcib1 memory window> request: start
> >> 0x600000000, end 0x6000fffff
> >>>>>>>>> panic: Failed to add resource to rman
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hmmm, I suspect this is due to the way that bus_translate_resource
> >> works which is
> >>>>>>>> fundamentally broken. It rewrites the start address of a resource
> >> in-situ instead
> >>>>>>>> of keeping downstream resources separate from the upstream
> >> resources. For example,
> >>>>>>>> I don't see how you could ever release a resource in this design
> >> without completely
> >>>>>>>> screwing up your rman. That is, I expect trying to detach a PCI
> >> device behind a
> >>>>>>>> translating bridge that uses the current approach should corrupt
> >> the allocated
> >>>>>>>> resource ranges in an rman long before my changes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That said, that doesn't really explain the panic. Hmm, the panic
> >> might be because
> >>>>>>>> for PCI bridge windows the driver now passes RF_ACTIVE and the
> >> bus_translate_resource
> >>>>>>>> hack only kicks in the activate_resource method of
> >> pci_host_generic.c.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Detail:
> >>>>>>>>> . . .
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: <BCM2838-compatible PCI-express controller> mem
> >> 0x7d500000-0x7d50930f irq 80,81 on simplebus2
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: parsing FDT for ECAM0:
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: PCI addr: 0xc0000000, CPU addr: 0x600000000, Size:
> >> 0x40000000
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This indicates this is a translating bus.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> pcib1: <PCI-PCI bridge> irq 91 at device 0.0 on pci0
> >>>>>>>>> rman_manage_region: <pcib1 bus numbers> request: start 0x1, end
> 0x1
> >>>>>>>>> pcib0: rman_reserve_resource: start=0xc0000000, end=0xc00fffff,
> >> count=0x100000
> >>>>>>>>> rman_reserve_resource_bound: <PCIe Memory> request: [0xc0000000,
> >> 0xc00fffff], length 0x100000, flags 102, device pcib1
> >>>>>>>>> rman_reserve_resource_bound: trying 0xffffffff
> <0xc0000000,0xfffff>
> >>>>>>>>> considering [0xc0000000, 0xffffffff]
> >>>>>>>>> truncated region: [0xc0000000, 0xc00fffff]; size 0x100000
> >> (requested 0x100000)
> >>>>>>>>> candidate region: [0xc0000000, 0xc00fffff], size 0x100000
> >>>>>>>>> allocating from the beginning
> >>>>>>>>> rman_manage_region: <pcib1 memory window> request: start
> >> 0x600000000, end 0x6000fffff
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What you later typed does not match:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0x600000000
> >>>>> 0x6000fffff
> >>>>>
> >>>>> You later typed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0x60000000
> >>>>> 0x600fffffff
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This seems to have lead to some confusion from using the
> >>>>> wrong figure(s).
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The fact that we are trying to reserve the CPU addresses in the
> >> rman is because
> >>>>>>>> bus_translate_resource rewrote the start address in the resource
> >> after it was allocated.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> That said, I can't see why rman_manage_region would actually fail.
> >> At this point the
> >>>>>>>> rman is empty (this is the first call to rman_manage_region for
> >> "pcib1 memory window"),
> >>>>>>>> so only the check that should be failing are the checks against
> >> rm_start and
> >>>>>>>> rm_end. For the memory window, rm_start is always 0, and rm_end
> is
> >> always
> >>>>>>>> 0xffffffff, so both the old (0xc00000000 - 0xc00fffff) and new
> >> (0x60000000 - 0x600fffffff)
> >>>>>>>> ranges are within those bounds.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> No:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0xffffffff
> >>>>>
> >>>>> .vs (actual):
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0x600000000
> >>>>> 0x6000fffff
> >>
> >> Ok, then this explains the failure if the "raw" addresses are above
> 4G. I
> >> have
> >> access to an emag I'm currently using to test fixes to
> pci_host_generic.c
> >> to
> >> avoid corrupting struct resource objects. I'll post the diff once I've
> got
> >> something verified to work.
> >>
> >>> It looks to me like in sys/dev/pci/pci_pci.c the:
> >>>
> >>> static void
> >>> pcib_probe_windows(struct pcib_softc *sc)
> >>> {
> >>> . . .
> >>> pcib_alloc_window(sc, &sc->mem, SYS_RES_MEMORY, 0,
> 0xffffffff);
> >>> . . .
> >>>
> >>> is just inappropriately restrictive about where in the system
> >>> address space a PCIe can validly be mapped to on the high end.
> >>> That, in turn, leads to the rejection on the RPi4B now that
> >>> the range use is checked.
> >>
> >> No, the physical register in PCI-PCI bridges is only 32-bits. Only the
> >> prefetchable BAR supports 64-bit addresses. This is why the host bridge
> >> is doing a translation from the CPU side (0x600000000) to the PCI BAR
> >> addresses (0xc0000000) so that the BAR addresses are down in the 32-bit
> >> address range. It's also true that many PCI devices only support 32-bit
> >> addresses in memory BARs. 64-bit BARs are an optional extension not
> >> universally supported.
> >>
> >> The translation here is somewhat akin to a type of MMU where the CPU
> >> addresses are mapped to PCI addresses. The problem here is that the
> >> PCI BAR resources need to "stay" as PCI addresses since we depend on
> >> being able to use rman_get_start/end to get the PCI addresses of
> >> allocated resources, but pci_host_generic.c currently rewrites the
> >> addresses.
> >>
> >> Probably I should remove rman_set_start/end entirely (Warner added them
> >> back in 2004) as the methods don't do anything to deal with the fallout
> >> that the rman.rm_list linked-list is no longer sorted by address once
> >> some addresses get rewritten, etc.
> >>
> >
> > At the time, they made sense. Removing it, though may take some doing
> > since we use it in about 284 places in sys/dev today... Somewhat more
> > pervasive than I'd have thought they'd be...
>
> Eh, I only find the one that I'm now removing:
>
> % git grep -E 'rman_set_(start|end)' sys/
> sys/dev/pci/pci_host_generic.c: rman_set_start(r, start);
> sys/dev/pci/pci_host_generic.c: rman_set_end(r, end);
> sys/kern/subr_rman.c:rman_set_start(struct resource *r, rman_res_t start)
> sys/kern/subr_rman.c:rman_set_end(struct resource *r, rman_res_t end)
> sys/sys/rman.h:void rman_set_end(struct resource *_r, rman_res_t _end);
> sys/sys/rman.h:void rman_set_start(struct resource *_r, rman_res_t
> _start);
>
> Also, I managed to boot the emag I have access to this morning. I had to
> fix a few other bugs in acpi(4) for my changes in pci_host_generic to work
> but will post reviews later today.
>
That's what happens when you grep for 'get' instead of 'set' before the
morning caffeine kicks in ..
Warner
