On 8/2/2017 4:27 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:15:15PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> My hypothesis was that CRS isn't useful on VFs because of sec 2.2.2
> says "FLR ... does not affect its existence in PCI Configuration
> Space".  But I think that hypothesis is wrong because sec 3.3.3.1
> does talk about a VF returning CRS.
> 

hmm, good catch. I'll drop the first patch.

> The SR-IOV spec (sec 3.4.1.1) says a VF's Vendor ID is read-only
> 0xffff.  But I expect CRS visibility (PCIe r3.1, sec 2.3.2) would work
> normally and return a Vendor ID of 0x0001 to indicate CRS for a VF.
> 
> Of course, not all Root Ports support CRS software visibility, so
> whatever we do has to work when it's absent.

How about a mixture of old code and new code as follows?

static void pci_flr_wait(struct pci_dev *dev)
{
        u32 id;
        bool ret = false;
        int i = 0;

        if (CRS supported) {
                /* don't touch the HW before waiting 100ms */
                msleep(100);

                ret = pci_bus_read_dev_vendor_id(dev->bus, dev->devfn, &id, 
60000);
                if (ret)
                        return;
        }

        do {
                msleep(100);
                pci_read_config_dword(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &id);
        } while (i++ < 10 && id == ~0);
 
        if (id == ~0)
                dev_warn(&dev->dev, "Failed to return from FLR\n");
        else if (i > 1)
                dev_info(&dev->dev, "Required additional %dms to return from 
FLR\n",
                         (i - 1) * 100);
}


-- 
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm 
Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.

Reply via email to