From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bhelgaas@google.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
rgummal@xilinx.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] PCI: xilinx-nwl: Fix Multi MSI data programming
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 17:31:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190612163120.GG15747@redmoon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86r27zarej.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 02:01:56PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:17:59 +0100,
> Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >
> > The current Multi MSI data programming fails if multiple end points
> > requesting MSI and multi MSI are connected with switch, i.e the current
> > multi MSI data being given is not considering the number of vectors
> > being requested in case of multi MSI.
> > Ex: Two EP's connected via switch, EP1 requesting single MSI first,
> > EP2 requesting Multi MSI of count four. The current code gives
> > MSI data 0x0 to EP1 and 0x1 to EP2, but EP2 can modify lower two bits
> > due to which EP2 also sends interrupt with MSI data 0x0 which results
> > in always invoking virq of EP1 due to which EP2 MSI interrupt never
> > gets handled.
>
> I think there is a much simpler explanation for this: Multi-MSI
> mandates that the base interrupt number is naturally aligned to its
> size. Having switches in the middle is just a way to expose the issue,
> but you could see it failing with a single end-point and two MSIs that
> are assigned on an odd boundary.
Agreed, I will rewrite the commit log with a link to the specs,
a switch has no role to play in this bug.
Lorenzo
> > Fix Multi MSI data programming with required alignment by
> > using number of vectors being requested.
> >
> > Fixes: ab597d35ef11 ("PCI: xilinx-nwl: Add support for Xilinx NWL PCIe
> > Host Controller")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com>
> > ---
> > V4:
> > - Using a different bitmap registration API whcih serves single and multi
> > MSI requests.
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c | 11 +++++------
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > index 81538d7..a9e07b8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > @@ -483,15 +483,13 @@ static int nwl_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
> > int i;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> > - bit = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(msi->bitmap, INT_PCI_MSI_NR, 0,
> > - nr_irqs, 0);
> > - if (bit >= INT_PCI_MSI_NR) {
> > + bit = bitmap_find_free_region(msi->bitmap, INT_PCI_MSI_NR,
> > + get_count_order(nr_irqs));
> > + if (bit < 0) {
> > mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> > return -ENOSPC;
> > }
> >
> > - bitmap_set(msi->bitmap, bit, nr_irqs);
> > -
> > for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
> > irq_domain_set_info(domain, virq + i, bit + i, &nwl_irq_chip,
> > domain->host_data, handle_simple_irq,
> > @@ -509,7 +507,8 @@ static void nwl_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
> > struct nwl_msi *msi = &pcie->msi;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> > - bitmap_clear(msi->bitmap, data->hwirq, nr_irqs);
> > + bitmap_release_region(msi->bitmap, data->hwirq,
> > + get_count_order(nr_irqs));
> > mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
> As for the body of the patch:
>
> Suggested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
> --
> Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Cc: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rgummal@xilinx.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] PCI: xilinx-nwl: Fix Multi MSI data programming
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 17:31:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190612163120.GG15747@redmoon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <86r27zarej.wl-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 02:01:56PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:17:59 +0100,
> Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >
> > The current Multi MSI data programming fails if multiple end points
> > requesting MSI and multi MSI are connected with switch, i.e the current
> > multi MSI data being given is not considering the number of vectors
> > being requested in case of multi MSI.
> > Ex: Two EP's connected via switch, EP1 requesting single MSI first,
> > EP2 requesting Multi MSI of count four. The current code gives
> > MSI data 0x0 to EP1 and 0x1 to EP2, but EP2 can modify lower two bits
> > due to which EP2 also sends interrupt with MSI data 0x0 which results
> > in always invoking virq of EP1 due to which EP2 MSI interrupt never
> > gets handled.
>
> I think there is a much simpler explanation for this: Multi-MSI
> mandates that the base interrupt number is naturally aligned to its
> size. Having switches in the middle is just a way to expose the issue,
> but you could see it failing with a single end-point and two MSIs that
> are assigned on an odd boundary.
Agreed, I will rewrite the commit log with a link to the specs,
a switch has no role to play in this bug.
Lorenzo
> > Fix Multi MSI data programming with required alignment by
> > using number of vectors being requested.
> >
> > Fixes: ab597d35ef11 ("PCI: xilinx-nwl: Add support for Xilinx NWL PCIe
> > Host Controller")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com>
> > ---
> > V4:
> > - Using a different bitmap registration API whcih serves single and multi
> > MSI requests.
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c | 11 +++++------
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > index 81538d7..a9e07b8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
> > @@ -483,15 +483,13 @@ static int nwl_irq_domain_alloc(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
> > int i;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> > - bit = bitmap_find_next_zero_area(msi->bitmap, INT_PCI_MSI_NR, 0,
> > - nr_irqs, 0);
> > - if (bit >= INT_PCI_MSI_NR) {
> > + bit = bitmap_find_free_region(msi->bitmap, INT_PCI_MSI_NR,
> > + get_count_order(nr_irqs));
> > + if (bit < 0) {
> > mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> > return -ENOSPC;
> > }
> >
> > - bitmap_set(msi->bitmap, bit, nr_irqs);
> > -
> > for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++) {
> > irq_domain_set_info(domain, virq + i, bit + i, &nwl_irq_chip,
> > domain->host_data, handle_simple_irq,
> > @@ -509,7 +507,8 @@ static void nwl_irq_domain_free(struct irq_domain *domain, unsigned int virq,
> > struct nwl_msi *msi = &pcie->msi;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&msi->lock);
> > - bitmap_clear(msi->bitmap, data->hwirq, nr_irqs);
> > + bitmap_release_region(msi->bitmap, data->hwirq,
> > + get_count_order(nr_irqs));
> > mutex_unlock(&msi->lock);
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.7.4
> >
>
> As for the body of the patch:
>
> Suggested-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>
> Thanks,
>
> M.
>
> --
> Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-12 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-12 10:17 [PATCH v4] PCI: xilinx-nwl: Fix Multi MSI data programming Bharat Kumar Gogada
2019-06-12 10:17 ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2019-06-12 13:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-12 13:01 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-06-12 16:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2019-06-12 16:31 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-17 9:21 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-17 9:21 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-18 12:28 ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2019-06-18 12:28 ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2019-06-18 13:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-06-18 13:03 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190612163120.GG15747@redmoon \
--to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
--cc=rgummal@xilinx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.