Re: [PATCH] PCI: Don't attempt to claim shadow copies of ROM

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 05:51:58PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> If we're using a shadow copy of a PCI device ROM, the shadow copy is in RAM
> and the device never sees accesses to it and doesn't respond to it.  We
> don't have to route the shadow range to the PCI device, and the device
> doesn't have to claim the range.
> 
> Previously we treated the shadow copy as though it were the ROM BAR, and we
> failed to claim it because the region wasn't routed to the device:
> 
>   pci 0000:01:00.0: Video device with shadowed ROM at [mem 0x000c0000-0x000dffff]
>   pci_bus 0000:01: Allocating resources
>   pci 0000:01:00.0: can't claim BAR 6 [mem 0x000c0000-0x000dffff]: no compatible bridge window
> 
> The failure path of pcibios_allocate_dev_rom_resource() cleared out the
> resource start address, which caused the following ioremap() warning:
> 
>   WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 116 at /build/linux-akdJXO/linux-4.8.0/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c:121 __ioremap_caller+0x1ec/0x370
>   ioremap on RAM at 0x0000000000000000 - 0x000000000001ffff
> 
> Handle a shadow copy as RAM, without inserting it into the iomem tree.
> 
> This fixes a regression caused by 0c0e0736acad ("PCI: Set ROM shadow
> location in arch code, not in PCI core"), which appeared in v4.6.  The
> effect is failure to initialize video devices, reported on AMD Turks but
> likely to affect others as well.
> 
> Fixes: 0c0e0736acad ("PCI: Set ROM shadow location in arch code, not in PCI core")
> Reported-and-tested-by: Vecu Bosseur <vecu.bosseur@xxxxxxxxx>
> Link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1627496
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=175391
> Link: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1352272
> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx	# v4.6+

I applied this to for-linus for v4.9.

I'm surprised we haven't seen more problems from this, given that it's
been there since v4.6, and anything using the shadow copy should be
broken.

> ---
>  drivers/pci/setup-res.c |    8 ++++++++
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> index 66c4d8f..9526e34 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/setup-res.c
> @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@ int pci_claim_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, int resource)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * If we have a shadow copy in RAM, the PCI device doesn't respond
> +	 * to the shadow range, so we don't need to claim it, and upstream
> +	 * bridges don't need to route the range to the device.
> +	 */
> +	if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_ROM_SHADOW)
> +		return 0;
> +
>  	root = pci_find_parent_resource(dev, res);
>  	if (!root) {
>  		dev_info(&dev->dev, "can't claim BAR %d %pR: no compatible bridge window\n",
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html