All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
	"suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PCI/MSI: add hooks to populate the msi_domain field
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:02:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5486C8BA.8030608@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5486585B.40000@huawei.com>

Hi Yijing,

On 09/12/14 02:03, Yijing Wang wrote:
> On 2014/12/9 4:12, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> In order to be able to populate the device msi_domain field,
>> add the necesary hooks to propagate the PHB msi_domain across
>> secondary busses to devices.
>>
>> So far, nobody populates the initial msi_domain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/pci/probe.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/pci.h |  1 +
>>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> index c8ca98c..d1009a2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> @@ -670,6 +670,20 @@ static void pci_set_bus_speed(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> +void __weak pcibios_set_phb_msi_domain(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pci_set_bus_msi_domain(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> +{
>> +	struct pci_dev *bridge = bus->self;
>> +
>> +	if (!bridge)
>> +		pcibios_set_phb_msi_domain(bus);
>> +	else
>> +		dev_set_msi_domain(&bus->dev, dev_get_msi_domain(&bridge->dev));
>> +}
> 
> 
> Hi Marc, we can not assume pci devices under same phb share the same msi irq domain,
> now in x86, pci devices under the same phb may associate different msi irq domain.

Well, this is not supposed to be a perfect solution yet, but instead a
basis for discussion. What I'd like to find out is:

- What is the minimum granularity for associating a device with its MSI
domain in existing platforms?
- What topology data structures do you use to find out what MSI
controller a device should be matched with?
- What in-tree platform already has this requirements?

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/6] PCI/MSI: add hooks to populate the msi_domain field
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:02:34 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5486C8BA.8030608@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5486585B.40000@huawei.com>

Hi Yijing,

On 09/12/14 02:03, Yijing Wang wrote:
> On 2014/12/9 4:12, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> In order to be able to populate the device msi_domain field,
>> add the necesary hooks to propagate the PHB msi_domain across
>> secondary busses to devices.
>>
>> So far, nobody populates the initial msi_domain.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/pci/probe.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/pci.h |  1 +
>>  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> index c8ca98c..d1009a2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
>> @@ -670,6 +670,20 @@ static void pci_set_bus_speed(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>  	}
>>  }
>>  
>> +void __weak pcibios_set_phb_msi_domain(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pci_set_bus_msi_domain(struct pci_bus *bus)
>> +{
>> +	struct pci_dev *bridge = bus->self;
>> +
>> +	if (!bridge)
>> +		pcibios_set_phb_msi_domain(bus);
>> +	else
>> +		dev_set_msi_domain(&bus->dev, dev_get_msi_domain(&bridge->dev));
>> +}
> 
> 
> Hi Marc, we can not assume pci devices under same phb share the same msi irq domain,
> now in x86, pci devices under the same phb may associate different msi irq domain.

Well, this is not supposed to be a perfect solution yet, but instead a
basis for discussion. What I'd like to find out is:

- What is the minimum granularity for associating a device with its MSI
domain in existing platforms?
- What topology data structures do you use to find out what MSI
controller a device should be matched with?
- What in-tree platform already has this requirements?

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-09 10:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-08 20:12 [PATCH 0/6] Introducing per-device MSI domain Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12 ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 1/6] device core: Introduce per-device MSI domain pointer Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 2/6] PCI/MSI: add hooks to populate the msi_domain field Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09  2:03   ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09  2:03     ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09 10:02     ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2014-12-09 10:02       ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 11:57       ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09 11:57         ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09 12:12         ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 12:12           ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 12:24           ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09 12:24             ` Yijing Wang
2014-12-09 12:47           ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 12:47             ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 14:03             ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 14:03               ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 14:11               ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 14:11                 ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 14:27                 ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 14:27                   ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 14:35                   ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 14:35                     ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 14:59                     ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 14:59                       ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-09 15:42                       ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 15:42                         ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 12:57   ` Jiang Liu
2014-12-09 12:57     ` Jiang Liu
2015-01-27  0:40   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-01-27  0:40     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-01-27  0:43     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-01-27  0:43       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 3/6] PCI/MSI: of: add support for OF-provided msi_domain Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2015-01-27  0:41   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-01-27  0:41     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 4/6] PCI/MSI: Let pci_msi_get_domain use struct device's msi_domain Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 5/6] irqchip: GICv2m: Get rid of struct msi_controller Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12 ` [PATCH 6/6] irqchip: gicv3-its: " Marc Zyngier
2014-12-08 20:12   ` Marc Zyngier

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=5486C8BA.8030608@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=jiang.liu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wangyijing@huawei.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.