Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64

From: Sandeepa Prabhu
Date: Wed Apr 23 2014 - 23:08:21 EST

Next message: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes/tracing: uprobe_perf_open() forgets to handle the error from uprobe_apply()"
Previous message: Stephen Rothwell: "linux-next: build failure after merge of the mfd-lj tree"
In reply to: Tanmay Inamdar: "Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 24 April 2014 02:02, Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Sandeepa,
>
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:50 AM, Sandeepa Prabhu
> <sandeepa.prabhu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 22 April 2014 15:41, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 09:58:28AM +0100, Sandeepa Prabhu wrote:
>>>> On 14 March 2014 21:04, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > This patch adds support for PCI to AArch64. It is based on my v7 patch
>>>> > that adds support for creating generic host bridge structure from
>>>> > device tree. With that in place, I was able to boot a platform that
>>>> > has PCIe host bridge support and use a PCIe network card.
>>>> Hi Liviu,
>>>>
>>>> Are these patches (including your other patchset for device tree host
>>>> bridge support ) available on a public git repo I can checkout from?
>>>
>>> Yes, I have pushed them into git://linux-arm.org/linux-ld.git
>> Thanks Liviu,
>> Just to understand, is the X-gene PCIe
>> (https://lwn.net/Articles/589733/) verified using the same patchset?
>
> Yes. V5 version of X-Gene PCIe patches have verified Liviu's patchset
> on X-Gene platform.
Thanks Tanmay!
>
>>
>> ~Sandeepa
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Liviu
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> ~Sandeepa
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > I have dropped the RFC tag from the subject as I now have the ambitious goal
>>>> > of trying to get it mainlined.
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v6:
>>>> > - Guard the pci_domain_nr() inline implementation with #ifdef CONFIG_PCI as
>>>> > to avoid conflict with default empty version present in include/linux/pci.h.
>>>> > Thanks to Jingoo Han for catching this.
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v5:
>>>> > - Removed pcibios_fixup_bridge_ranges() as the week default version is fine.
>>>> > - Removed the ALIGN() call in pcibios_align_resource()
>>>> > - Stopped exporting pcibios_align_resource()
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v4:
>>>> > - Fixed the pci_domain_nr() implementation for arm64. Now we use
>>>> > find_pci_host_bride() to find the host bridge before we retrieve
>>>> > the domain number.
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v3:
>>>> > - Added Acks accumulated so far ;)
>>>> > - Still carrying Catalin's patch for moving the PCI_IO_BASE until it
>>>> > lands in linux-next or mainline, in order to ease applying the series
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v2:
>>>> > - Implement an arch specific version of pci_register_io_range() and
>>>> > pci_address_to_pio().
>>>> > - Return 1 from pci_proc_domain().
>>>> >
>>>> > Changes from v1:
>>>> > - Added Catalin's patch for moving the PCI_IO_BASE location and extend
>>>> > its size to 16MB
>>>> > - Integrated Arnd's version of pci_ioremap_io that uses a bitmap for
>>>> > keeping track of assigned IO space and returns an io_offset. At the
>>>> > moment the code is added in arch/arm64 but it can be moved in drivers/pci.
>>>> > - Added a fix for the generic ioport_map() function when !CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP
>>>> > as suggested by Arnd.
>>>> >
>>>> > v6 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/5/41
>>>> > v5 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/4/307
>>>> > v4 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/3/298
>>>> > v3 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/28/211
>>>> > v2 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/27/255
>>>> > v1 thread here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/2/3/389
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > The API used is different from the one used by ARM architecture. There is
>>>> > no pci_common_init_dev() function and no hw_pci structure, as that is no
>>>> > longer needed. Once the last signature is added to the legal agreement, I
>>>> > will post the host bridge driver code that I am using. Meanwhile, here
>>>> > is an example of what the probe function looks like, posted as an example:
>>>> >
>>>> > static int myhostbridge_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> > {
>>>> > int err;
>>>> > struct device_node *dev;
>>>> > struct pci_host_bridge *bridge;
>>>> > struct myhostbridge_port *pp;
>>>> > resource_size_t lastbus;
>>>> >
>>>> > dev = pdev->dev.of_node;
>>>> >
>>>> > if (!of_device_is_available(dev)) {
>>>> > pr_warn("%s: disabled\n", dev->full_name);
>>>> > return -ENODEV;
>>>> > }
>>>> >
>>>> > pp = kzalloc(sizeof(struct myhostbridge_port), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>> > if (!pp)
>>>> > return -ENOMEM;
>>>> >
>>>> > bridge = of_create_pci_host_bridge(&pdev->dev, &myhostbridge_ops, pp);
>>>> > if (IS_ERR(bridge)) {
>>>> > err = PTR_ERR(bridge);
>>>> > goto bridge_create_fail;
>>>> > }
>>>> >
>>>> > err = myhostbridge_setup(bridge->bus);
>>>> > if (err)
>>>> > goto bridge_setup_fail;
>>>> >
>>>> > /* We always enable PCI domains and we keep domain 0 backward
>>>> > * compatible in /proc for video cards
>>>> > */
>>>> > pci_add_flags(PCI_ENABLE_PROC_DOMAINS);
>>>> > pci_add_flags(PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_BUS | PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_RSRC);
>>>> >
>>>> > lastbus = pci_scan_child_bus(bridge->bus);
>>>> > pci_bus_update_busn_res_end(bridge->bus, lastbus);
>>>> >
>>>> > pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources(bridge->bus);
>>>> >
>>>> > pci_bus_add_devices(bridge->bus);
>>>> >
>>>> > return 0;
>>>> >
>>>> > bridge_setup_fail:
>>>> > put_device(&bridge->dev);
>>>> > device_unregister(&bridge->dev);
>>>> > bridge_create_fail:
>>>> > kfree(pp);
>>>> > return err;
>>>> > }
>>>> >
>>>> > Best regards,
>>>> > Liviu
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Catalin Marinas (1):
>>>> > arm64: Extend the PCI I/O space to 16MB
>>>> >
>>>> > Liviu Dudau (2):
>>>> > Fix ioport_map() for !CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP cases.
>>>> > arm64: Add architecture support for PCI
>>>> >
>>>> > Documentation/arm64/memory.txt | 16 +--
>>>> > arch/arm64/Kconfig | 19 +++-
>>>> > arch/arm64/include/asm/Kbuild | 1 +
>>>> > arch/arm64/include/asm/io.h | 5 +-
>>>> > arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h | 51 +++++++++
>>>> > arch/arm64/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
>>>> > arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> > include/asm-generic/io.h | 2 +-
>>>> > 8 files changed, 258 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>> > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/pci.h
>>>> > create mode 100644 arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > 1.9.0
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>> > linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>>>> > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ====================
>>> | I would like to |
>>> | fix the world, |
>>> | but they're not |
>>> | giving me the |
>>> \ source code! /
>>> ---------------
>>> Â\_(ã)_/Â
>>>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] uprobes/tracing: uprobe_perf_open() forgets to handle the error from uprobe_apply()"
Previous message: Stephen Rothwell: "linux-next: build failure after merge of the mfd-lj tree"
In reply to: Tanmay Inamdar: "Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] Add support for PCI in AArch64"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]