Re: [PATCHv2 4/4] PCI: dwc: add prefetchable memory range support

From: Lorenzo Pieralisi
Date: Tue Dec 11 2018 - 10:19:18 EST

Next message: Cyrill Gorcunov: "Re: [PATCH v3] ksm: React on changing "sleep_millisecs" parameter faster"
Previous message: Rob Herring: "Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: light: isl29018: update power supply name"
In reply to: Z.q. Hou: "RE: [PATCHv2 4/4] PCI: dwc: add prefetchable memory range support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 10:21:08AM +0000, Z.q. Hou wrote:

[...]

> > > + */
> > > + if (pci->num_viewport < 2) {
> > > + ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "num-viewport",
> > > + &pci->num_viewport);
> > > + if (ret || pci->num_viewport < 2)
> > > + pci->num_viewport = 2;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * if there are only 2 viewports, assign the last viewport for
> > > + * both CFG and IO window, otherwise assign the last 2 viewport
> >
> > Gah. Can anyone explain to me how this driver works if only two
> > viewports are available ? What happens if an IO access happens at
> > the same time of a config access (that fiddles with the outbound
> > memory windows) ?

Guys, this is utterly broken. If the IP does not have enough address
decoders it is better not to support IO at all rather implementing
it with this broken code that can fail anytime.

This ought to be fixed and it is not a problem with this patch it
is a *bug* in the mainline kernel.

Lorenzo

> You are right it has potential IO transaction drop issue, but DWC PCIe databook does give a default value 2 of viewport number.
>
>
> > > + * for CFG and IO window specific. And the rest viewports are
> > > + * assigned to MEM windows.
> > > + */
> > > + if (pci->num_viewport == 2) {
> > > + pp->cfg_idx = pp->io_idx = PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX1;
> > > + pp->mem_wins = 1;
> > > + } else {
> > > + pp->cfg_idx = pci->num_viewport - 1;
> > > + pp->io_idx = pci->num_viewport - 2;
> > > + pp->mem_wins = pci->num_viewport - 2;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + dev_dbg(dev, "CFG win id: %d, I/O win id: %d, Total MEM win: %d\n",
> > > + pp->cfg_idx, pp->io_idx, pp->mem_wins);
> > > +
> > > bridge = pci_alloc_host_bridge(0);
> > > if (!bridge)
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > > @@ -377,10 +406,20 @@ int dw_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > }
> > > break;
> > > case IORESOURCE_MEM:
> > > - pp->mem = win->res;
> > > - pp->mem->name = "MEM";
> > > - pp->mem_size = resource_size(pp->mem);
> > > - pp->mem_bus_addr = pp->mem->start - win->offset;
> > > + if (win->res->flags & IORESOURCE_PREFETCH) {
> > > + pp->mem_perf = win->res;
> > > + pp->mem_perf->name = "MEM perf";
> >
> > Nit: Why "perf" and not "pref" ?
> >
> > It is confusing but that's the least of this patch problems.
>
> My bad, it is typo, will fix in next version.
>
> >
> > > + pp->mem_perf_size = resource_size(pp->mem_perf);
> > > + pp->mem_perf_bus_addr = pp->mem_perf->start -
> > > + win->offset;
> > > + pp->mem_perf_base = pp->mem_perf->start;
> > > + } else {
> > > + pp->mem = win->res;
> > > + pp->mem->name = "MEM";
> > > + pp->mem_size = resource_size(pp->mem);
> > > + pp->mem_bus_addr = pp->mem->start - win->offset;
> > > + pp->mem_base = pp->mem->start;
> > > + }
> > > break;
> > > case 0:
> > > pp->cfg = win->res;
> > > @@ -406,8 +445,6 @@ int dw_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > - pp->mem_base = pp->mem->start;
> > > -
> > > if (!pp->va_cfg0_base) {
> > > pp->va_cfg0_base = devm_pci_remap_cfgspace(dev,
> > > pp->cfg0_base, pp->cfg0_size);
> > > @@ -534,12 +571,12 @@ static int dw_pcie_rd_other_conf(struct
> > pcie_port *pp, struct pci_bus *bus,
> > > va_cfg_base = pp->va_cfg1_base;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX1,
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, pp->cfg_idx,
> > > type, cpu_addr,
> > > busdev, cfg_size);
> > > ret = dw_pcie_read(va_cfg_base + where, size, val);
> > > - if (pci->num_viewport <= 2)
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX1,
> > > + if (pp->cfg_idx == pp->io_idx)
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, pp->io_idx,
> > > PCIE_ATU_TYPE_IO, pp->io_base,
> > > pp->io_bus_addr, pp->io_size);
> >
> > See above, even though this is not related to this patch.
>
> I think it is more reasonable to check if the CFG and IO shared viewport than the viewport number.
>
> >
> > >
> > > @@ -573,12 +610,12 @@ static int dw_pcie_wr_other_conf(struct
> > pcie_port *pp, struct pci_bus *bus,
> > > va_cfg_base = pp->va_cfg1_base;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX1,
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, pp->cfg_idx,
> > > type, cpu_addr,
> > > busdev, cfg_size);
> > > ret = dw_pcie_write(va_cfg_base + where, size, val);
> > > - if (pci->num_viewport <= 2)
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX1,
> > > + if (pp->cfg_idx == pp->io_idx)
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, pp->io_idx,
> > > PCIE_ATU_TYPE_IO, pp->io_base,
> > > pp->io_bus_addr, pp->io_size);
> > >
> > > @@ -652,6 +689,9 @@ static u8 dw_pcie_iatu_unroll_enabled(struct
> > > dw_pcie *pci) void dw_pcie_setup_rc(struct pcie_port *pp) {
> > > u32 val, ctrl, num_ctrls;
> > > + u64 remain_size, base, win_size;
> > > + phys_addr_t bus_addr;
> > > + int i;
> > > struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
> > >
> > > dw_pcie_setup(pci);
> > > @@ -700,13 +740,42 @@ void dw_pcie_setup_rc(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > dev_dbg(pci->dev, "iATU unroll: %s\n",
> > > pci->iatu_unroll_enabled ? "enabled" : "disabled");
> > >
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX0,
> > > - PCIE_ATU_TYPE_MEM, pp->mem_base,
> > > - pp->mem_bus_addr, pp->mem_size);
> > > - if (pci->num_viewport > 2)
> > > - dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX2,
> > > - PCIE_ATU_TYPE_IO, pp->io_base,
> > > - pp->io_bus_addr, pp->io_size);
> > > + /*
> > > + * The maximum region size is 4 GB, and a region
> > > + * must not cross a 4 GB boundary.
> > > + */
> > > + win_size = SZ_4G - (pp->mem_base & (SZ_4G - 1));
> > > + win_size = min(win_size, pp->mem_size);
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, 0, PCIE_ATU_TYPE_MEM,
> > > + pp->mem_base, pp->mem_bus_addr,
> > > + win_size);
> > > + dev_dbg(pci->dev,
> > > + "iATU: non-pref MEM: win = %d: base = %llx, bus_addr = %pa,
> > size = %llx\n",
> > > + 0, pp->mem_base, &pp->mem_bus_addr, win_size);
> > > +
> > > + /* Prefetchable range can be 64bit space */
> > > + remain_size = pp->mem_perf_size;
> >
> > unallocated/free_size ?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand your question.
>
> >
> > > + base = pp->mem_perf_base;
> > > + bus_addr = pp->mem_perf_bus_addr;
> > > + for (i = 1; remain_size > 0 && i < pp->mem_wins; i++) {
> > > + win_size = SZ_4G - (base & (SZ_4G - 1));
> > > + win_size = min(win_size, remain_size);
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, i, PCIE_ATU_TYPE_MEM,
> > > + base, bus_addr, win_size);
> > > + dev_dbg(pci->dev, "iATU: pref MEM: win = %d: base = %llx,
> > bus_addr = %pa, size = %llx\n",
> > > + i, base, &bus_addr, win_size);
> > > +
> > > + base += win_size;
> > > + bus_addr += win_size;
> > > + remain_size -= win_size;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (remain_size > 0)
> > > + dev_info(pci->dev, "iATU: MEM window isn't enough\n");
> > > +
> > > + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(pci, pp->io_idx, PCIE_ATU_TYPE_IO,
> > > + pp->io_base, pp->io_bus_addr,
> > > + pp->io_size);
> > > }
> > >
> > > dw_pcie_wr_own_conf(pp, PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_0, 4, 0); diff --git
> > > a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > > b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > > index a438c3879aa9..0197f67f82b7 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
> > > @@ -148,15 +148,22 @@ struct pcie_port {
> > > u64 cfg1_base;
> > > void __iomem *va_cfg1_base;
> > > u32 cfg1_size;
> > > + u32 cfg_idx;
> > > resource_size_t io_base;
> > > phys_addr_t io_bus_addr;
> > > u32 io_size;
> > > + u32 io_idx;
> > > u64 mem_base;
> > > phys_addr_t mem_bus_addr;
> > > u64 mem_size;
> > > + u64 mem_perf_base;
> >
> > This is a phys_addr_t
> >
> > > + phys_addr_t mem_perf_bus_addr;
> >
> > pci_bus_addr_t ?
>
> Will fix in next version.
>
> >
> > Lorenzo
> >
> > > + u64 mem_perf_size;
> > > + u32 mem_wins;
> > > struct resource *cfg;
> > > struct resource *io;
> > > struct resource *mem;
> > > + struct resource *mem_perf;
> > > struct resource *busn;
> > > int irq;
> > > const struct dw_pcie_host_ops *ops;
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1
> > >
>
> Thanks,
> Zhiqiang

Next message: Cyrill Gorcunov: "Re: [PATCH v3] ksm: React on changing "sleep_millisecs" parameter faster"
Previous message: Rob Herring: "Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: light: isl29018: update power supply name"
In reply to: Z.q. Hou: "RE: [PATCHv2 4/4] PCI: dwc: add prefetchable memory range support"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]