From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@google.com>
To: Dustin Howett <dustin@howett.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] platform/chrome: reserve only the I/O ports required for the MEC EC
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2022 14:24:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YfDpCqffa+5Zypg4@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+BfgNKRNXVxLhQ2mAxiq-c3ipkFPdYoZee6myO8djmXWnfrYg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 09:15:45AM -0600, Dustin Howett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:17 PM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@google.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The original code:
> > - devm_request_region(dev, EC_LPC_ADDR_MEMMAP, ...) and then
> > - cros_ec_lpc_ops.read(EC_LPC_ADDR_MEMMAP + EC_MEMMAP_ID, ...).
> >
> > After the patch:
> > - devm_request_region(dev, EC_HOST_CMD_REGION0, ...) and then
> > - cros_ec_lpc_ops.read(EC_LPC_ADDR_MEMMAP + EC_MEMMAP_ID, ...).
> >
> > Does it work if it reads out of request_region range?
> >
> >
> > The 2 request_region are now guarded by the first "if (buf[0] != 'E' || buf[1] != 'C')". That is, only non-MEC will request the 2 regions.
> >
> > Doesn't other MECs (e.g. non-Framework Laptop) need the 2 regions?
>
> So, in both cases this should be legal. Here's why:
>
> The MEC protocol multiplexes memory-mapped reads through the same 8
> I/O ports (0x800 - 0x807)
> as it does host commands. It works by adjusting the base address,
> EC_LPC_ADDR_MEMMAP (0x900),
> to 0x100 before it initiates a standard MEC LPC xfer.
> See cros_ec_lpc_mec_read_bytes line ~101 (as of 881007522c8fcc3785).
>
> Therefore, the adjusted flow in the patch is:
>
> 0. Default cros_ec_lpc_ops to the MEC version of read/xfer [unchanged in patch]
> 1. Request 0x800 - 0x807 (MEC region)
> 2. read() using the MEC read function (using only the above ports)
> 3. if it succeeds, great! we have a MEC EC.
> --- if it failed ---
> 4. Map the non-MEC port range 0x900 - 0x9FF for memory-mapped reads
> 5. read() using the NON-MEC read function (using ports 0x900 - 0x9FF)
> 6. if it succeeds, map the remaining host command ports 0x808 - 0x8FF
>
> In short, only non-MEC needs the 0x900 - 0x9FF mapping for "mapped
> memory". Therefore we can defer the
> port allocation until after we've failed to read mapped memory the MEC way. :)
>
> Based on my understanding of the MEC protocol, non-Framework Laptop
> MECs hold this invariant true as well.
> They should only need ports 0x800 - 0x807.
Thanks for the detail explanation. After reading cros_ec_lpc_mec_read_bytes() carefully, I guess I got it.
The patch actually fixes 2 issues:
1. The original code accesses the 8 IO ports (i.e. 0x800 - 0x807) via cros_ec_lpc_mec_read_bytes(EC_LPC_ADDR_MEMMAP + EC_MEMMAP_ID, ...) without requesting the region in advance.
2. MEC variants only need to request the 8 IO ports. However, the rest of ports (i.e. 0x808 - 0x9ff) are for non-MECs.
> Want me to send a v2 with updated commit messages?
Yes, that would be helpful.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-26 6:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-05 3:12 [PATCH 0/2] platform/chrome: Add support for the Framework Laptop Dustin L. Howett
2022-01-05 3:12 ` [PATCH 1/2] platform/chrome: cros-ec: detect " Dustin L. Howett
2022-01-25 3:41 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2022-01-25 4:16 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2022-01-05 3:12 ` [PATCH 2/2] platform/chrome: reserve only the I/O ports required for the MEC EC Dustin L. Howett
2022-01-25 3:42 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2022-01-25 4:17 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2022-01-25 15:15 ` Dustin Howett
2022-01-26 6:24 ` Tzung-Bi Shih [this message]
2022-01-24 20:51 ` [PATCH 0/2] platform/chrome: Add support for the Framework Laptop Benson Leung
2022-01-25 1:12 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2022-01-25 16:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2022-01-25 17:38 ` Benson Leung
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-01-08 23:03 [PATCH 2/2] platform/chrome: reserve only the I/O ports required for the MEC EC kernel test robot
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=YfDpCqffa+5Zypg4@google.com \
--to=tzungbi@google.com \
--cc=bleung@chromium.org \
--cc=dustin@howett.net \
--cc=groeck@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.