Re: [PATCH] SR-IOV: correct broken resource alignment calculations

From: Chris Wright
Date: Fri Aug 28 2009 - 16:00:15 EST

* Greg KH (greg@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:17:14PM -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> > An SR-IOV capable device includes an SR-IOV PCIe capability which
> > describes the Virtual Function (VF) BAR requirements. A typical SR-IOV
> > device can support multiple VFs whose BARs must be in a contiguous region,
> > effectively an array of VF BARs. The BAR reports the size requirement
> > for a single VF. We calculate the full range needed by simply multiplying
> > the VF BAR size with the number of possible VFs and create a resource
> > spanning the full range.
> >
> > This all seems sane enough except it artificially inflates the alignment
> > requirement for the VF BAR. The VF BAR need only be aligned to the size
> > of a single BAR not the contiguous range of VF BARs. This can cause us
> > to fail to allocate resources for the BAR despite the fact that we
> > actually have enough space.
> >
> > This patch adds a support for a new resource alignment type,
> > IORESOURCE_VSIZEALIGN, and allows struct resource to keep track of the
> > size requirements of a VF BAR which are smaller than the full resource
> > size. This could also be done all within the PCI layer w/out bloating
> > struct resource or using the last available bit for alignment types.
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@xxxxxx>
> > Cc: Yu Zhao <yu.zhao@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxx
> This is a new feature, which seems to be odd to have it sent to stable
> :)

Yeah, it's broken now (and shipped in 2.6.30).

> Does this fix reported problems in the "wild"?

Depending on card firwmware, yeah, I've hit this problem.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at