Intel-Wired-Lan Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
To: Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@intel.com>,
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>
Cc: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>,
	przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 4/5] ice: Remove unnecessary offset calculation for PF scoped registers
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 15:12:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <31ea8ffb-ee35-8595-e66d-ea56001cdd43@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240930121022.671217-5-karol.kolacinski@intel.com>



On 9/30/2024 5:08 AM, Karol Kolacinski wrote:
> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
> 
> The PFTSYN_SEM, PFINT_TSYN_MSK and PFHH_SEM registers are defined in the
> datasheet as "PF scoped". PF scoped registers appear in the datasheet to
> have a different offset per PF. This is misleading. Each PF has its own
> scope of the register, and accessing any of the offsets on a given PF
> will read the PF-appropriate register. There is no reason to calculate
> different offsets when reading and writing to these registers.
> 
> The original code implementing access to the semaphore registers failed
> to understand this nature of PF-scoped registers and included additional
> offset calculations. Remove these.
> 
> This can be tested with direct access to the registers to show that each
> PF sees its own scoped register:
> 
>    user@system:~ice$ for i in {0..7}; do sudo readpci -q -s 17:00.0 \
>                      -a $((0x88880 + 4*i)); done
>    0x88880 == 0x00000001
>    0x88884 == 0x00000001
>    0x88888 == 0x00000001
>    0x8888c == 0x00000001
>    0x88890 == 0x00000001
>    0x88894 == 0x00000001
>    0x88898 == 0x00000001
>    0x8889c == 0x00000001
>    user@system:~ice$ for i in {0..7}; do sudo readpci -q -s 17:00.0 \
>                      -a $((0x88880 + 4*i)) -w 0 ; done
>    0x88880 == 0x00000000
>    0x88884 == 0x00000000
>    0x88888 == 0x00000000
>    0x8888c == 0x00000000
>    0x88890 == 0x00000000
>    0x88894 == 0x00000000
>    0x88898 == 0x00000000
>    0x8889c == 0x00000000
>    user@system:~ice$ for i in {0..7}; do sudo readpci -q -s 17:00.0 \
>                      -a $((0x88880 + 4*i)); done
>    0x88880 == 0x00000001
>    0x88884 == 0x00000001
>    0x88888 == 0x00000001
>    0x8888c == 0x00000001
>    0x88890 == 0x00000001
>    0x88894 == 0x00000001
>    0x88898 == 0x00000001
>    0x8889c == 0x00000001
> 
> Additionally, you can quickly tell that the PF-offset doesn't matter
> because its not an included parameter of the auto-generated register
> header file. Other parameters which do matter get generated as part of
> the offset macros.
> 
> Fix the uses of PFTSYN_SEM, PFINT_TSYN_MSK and PFHH_SEM to stop doing
> the unnecessary offset calculation.

This also sounds like -next material rather than a bug fix.

Thanks,
Tony

> Fixes: 7d606a1e2d05 ("ice: unify logic for programming PFINT_TSYN_MSK")
> Fixes: 03cb4473be92 ("ice: add low level PTP clock access functions")
> Fixes: 13a64f0b9894 ("ice: support crosstimestamping on E822 devices if supported")
> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Karol Kolacinski <karol.kolacinski@intel.com>


  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-02 22:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-30 12:08 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 0/5] Fix E825 initialization Karol Kolacinski
2024-09-30 12:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 1/5] ice: " Karol Kolacinski
2024-10-02 22:00   ` Tony Nguyen
2024-09-30 12:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 2/5] ice: Fix quad registers read on E825 Karol Kolacinski
2024-10-02 22:08   ` Tony Nguyen
2024-09-30 12:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 3/5] ice: Fix ETH56G FC-FEC Rx offset value Karol Kolacinski
2024-09-30 12:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 4/5] ice: Remove unnecessary offset calculation for PF scoped registers Karol Kolacinski
2024-10-02 22:12   ` Tony Nguyen [this message]
2024-09-30 12:08 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net 5/5] ice: Add correct PHY lane assignment Karol Kolacinski

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=31ea8ffb-ee35-8595-e66d-ea56001cdd43@intel.com \
    --to=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
    --cc=arkadiusz.kubalewski@intel.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
    --cc=karol.kolacinski@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox