All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
To: Bharat Kumar Gogada <bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	nofooter <nofooter@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at pci_enable_msi_range call
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 16:39:55 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <578660CB.5030301@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8520D5D51A55D047800579B094147198258B8C86@XAP-PVEXMBX01.xlnx.xilinx.com>

On 13/07/16 16:34, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>> On 13/07/16 10:36, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>> Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at pci_enable_msi_range
>>>> call
>>>>
>>>> On 13/07/16 10:10, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>>>> Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at
>>>>>> pci_enable_msi_range call
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 13/07/16 09:33, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at
>>>>>>>> pci_enable_msi_range call
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 13/07/16 07:22, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at
>>>>>>>>>> pci_enable_msi_range call
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/07/16 10:33, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for the reply.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From PCIe Spec:
>>>>>>>>>>> MSI Enable Bit:
>>>>>>>>>>> If 1 and the MSI-X Enable bit in the MSI-X Message Control
>>>>>>>>>>> register (see Section 6.8.2.3) is 0, the function is permitted
>>>>>>>>>>> to use MSI to request service and is prohibited from using its
>>>>>>>>>>> INTx#
>>>> pin.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> From Endpoint perspective, MSI Enable = 1 indicates MSI can be
>>>>>>>>>>> used
>>>>>>>>>> which means MSI address and data fields are
>> available/programmed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In our SoC whenever MSI Enable goes from 0 --> 1 the hardware
>>>>>>>>>>> latches
>>>>>>>>>> onto MSI address and MSI data values.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> With current MSI implementation in kernel, our SoC is latching
>>>>>>>>>>> on to incorrect address and data values, as address/data are
>>>>>>>>>>> updated much later
>>>>>>>>>> than MSI Enable bit.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As a side question, how does setting the affinity work on this
>>>>>>>>>> end-point if this involves changing the address programmed in
>>>>>>>>>> the MSI
>>>>>>>> registers?
>>>>>>>>>> Do you expect the enabled bit to be toggled to around the write?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yes,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Well, that's pretty annoying, as this will not work either. But
>>>>>>>> maybe your
>>>>>> MSI
>>>>>>>> controller has a single doorbell? You haven't mentioned which HW
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>> is...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The MSI address/data is located in config space, in our SoC for
>>>>>>> the logic
>>>>>> behind PCIe
>>>>>>> to become aware of new address/data  MSI enable transition is used
>>>>>>> (0 to
>>>>>> 1).
>>>>>>> The logic cannot keep polling these registers in configuration
>>>>>>> space as it
>>>>>> would consume power.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So the logic uses the transition in MSI enable to latch on to
>> address/data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I understand the "why". I'm just wondering if your SoC needs to
>>>>>> have the MSI address changed when changing the affinity of the MSI?
>>>>>> What MSI controller are you using? Is it in mainline?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please give more information on MSI affinity ?
>>>>> For cpu affinity for interrupts we would use MSI-X.
>>>>>
>>>>> We are using GIC 400 v2.
>>>>
>>>> None of that is relevant. GIC400 doesn't have the faintest notion of
>>>> what an MSI is, and MSI-X vs MSI is an end-point property.
>>>>
>>>> Please answer these questions: does your MSI controller have a unique
>>>> doorbell, or multiple doorbells? Does it use wired interrupts (SPIs)
>>>> connected to the GIC? Is the support code for this MSI controller in
>> mainline or not?
>>>>
>>>
>>> It has single doorbell.
>>> The MSI decoding is part of our PCIe bridge, and it has SPI to GIC.
>>> Our root driver is in mainline drivers/pci/host/pcie-xilinx-nwl.c
>>
>> OK, so you're not affected by this affinity setting issue. Please let me know if
>> the patch I sent yesterday improve things for you once you have a chance to
>> test it.
>>
> Hi Marc,
> 
> I tested with the patch you provided, now it is working for us.

Thanks, I'll repost this as a proper patch with your Tested-by.

> Can you please point to any doc related to affinity in MSI, until now we
> came across affinity for MSI-X. I will explore more on it.

I don't have anything at hand, but simply look at how MSI (and MSI-X) is
implemented on x86, for example: each CPU has its own doorbell, and
changing the affinity of a MSI is done by changing the target address of
that interrupt. And it doesn't seem that the kernel switches the Enable
bit off and on for those.

Thanks,

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

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-13 15:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-11  2:32 PCIe MSI address is not written at pci_enable_msi_range call Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-11  8:47 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-11  9:33   ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-11 10:21     ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-11 10:51       ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-11 15:50         ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-12  9:11           ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-12 14:28             ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-12 15:56     ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-13  6:22       ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-13  8:16         ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-13  8:33           ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-13  8:37             ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-13  9:10               ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-13  9:19                 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-13  9:36                   ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-13  9:40                     ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-13 15:34                       ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-13 15:39                         ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2016-07-20 12:19             ` Marc Zyngier
2016-07-27 11:14               ` Bharat Kumar Gogada
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-07-11  2:37 Bharat Kumar Gogada
2016-07-11  5:55 Bharat

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=578660CB.5030301@arm.com \
    --to=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bharat.kumar.gogada@xilinx.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nofooter@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.