RE: [PATCH V3 2/4] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on Hip06
From: Gabriele Paoloni
Date: Mon Sep 26 2016 - 09:22:19 EST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@xxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 23 September 2016 14:43
> To: Gabriele Paoloni
> Cc: zhichang.yuan; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; minyard@xxxxxxx;
> linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John Garry;
> will.deacon@xxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yuanzhichang;
> Linuxarm; xuwei (O); linux-serial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; zourongrong@xxxxxxxxx; liviu.dudau@xxxxxxx;
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on
> On Friday, September 23, 2016 10:23:30 AM CEST Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> > Hi Arnd
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@xxxxxxxx]
> > > Sent: 23 September 2016 10:52
> > > To: zhichang.yuan
> > > Cc: Gabriele Paoloni; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx;
> > > linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John Garry;
> > > will.deacon@xxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yuanzhichang;
> > > Linuxarm; xuwei (O); linux-serial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > benh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; zourongrong@xxxxxxxxx;
> > > kantyzc@xxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on
> > > Hip06
> > >
> > > On Friday, September 23, 2016 12:27:17 AM CEST zhichang.yuan wrote:
> > > > For this patch sketch, I have a question.
> > > > Do we call pci_address_to_pio in arch_of_address_to_pio to get
> > > > corresponding logical IO port
> > > > for LPC??
> > >
> > >
> > > No, of course not, that would be silly:
> > >
> > > The argument to pci_address_to_pio() is a phys_addr_t, and we we
> > > have one because there is no address associated with your PIO, that
> > > is the entire point of your driver!
> > >
> > > Also, we already know the mapping because this is what the inb/outb
> > > workaround is looking at, so there is absolutely no reason to call
> > > either.
> > Ok assume that we do not call pci_address_to_pio() for the ISA bus...
> > The LPC driver will register its phys address range in io_range_list,
> > then the IPMI driver probe will retrieve its physical address calling
> > of_address_to_resource and will use the indirect io to access this
> > address.
> > From the perspective of the indirect IO function the input parameter
> > is an unsigned long addr that (now) can be either:
> > 1) an IO token coming from a legacy pci device
> > 2) a phys address that lives on the LPC bus
> > These are conceptually two separate address spaces (and actually they
> > both start from 0).
> Why? Any IORESOURCE_IO address always refers to the logical I/O port
> range in Linux, not the physical address that is used on a bus.
> > If the input parameter can live on different address spaces that are
> > overlapped, even if I save the used LPC range in arm64_extio_ops-
> > there is no way for the indirect IO to tell if the input parameter is
> > an I/O token or a phys address that belongs to LPC...
Assume that in the probe function the LPC drivers calls pci_register_io_range
for the LPC cpu address range (0 to PCIBIOS_MIN_I0) and does not scan
the children DT nodes.
Consider for example the ipmi driver:
When the reg property is read to retrieve the ipmi <<i/o port>> in
if we do not call pci_address_to_pio in __of_address_to_resource the input
parameter of inb/outb will be the cpu address of the ipmi (not translated
to a unique token id).
So inb/outb at this stage can be called passing either a cpu address or a
token io port.
If we set arm64_extio_ops->start/end to 0 and PCIBIOS_MIN_I0 respectively
we still cannot tell inside inb/outb if the passed address is a token or
an LPC cpu address as the ipmi cpu address can overlap with another device
My suggestion is to call pci_address_to_pio even for devices living on
the LPC bus; then in the LPC probe we set arm64_extio_ops->start/end to
the I/O tokens that correspond to the LPC cpu address range (in the LPC probe
function we call pci_address_to_pio after we have called pci_register_io_range);
finally in inb/outb we know that we can get only an I/O token as input
parameter and we check it against arm64_extio_ops->start/end to decide
whether to call the LPC accessors or readb/writeb...
> The start address is the offset: if you get an address between 'start'
> and 'end', you subtract the 'start' from it, and use that to call
> the registered driver function. That works because we can safely
> assume that the bus address range that the LPC driver registers starts
Sorry I cannot follow what you said here above: <<if you get an address
between 'start' and 'end'>>...in which function?