From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lan Tianyu Subject: Re: [Resend PATCH 5/5] IA64/PCI/ACPI: Rework PCI root bridge ACPI resource conversion Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 10:26:03 +0800 Message-ID: <5271BFBB.8040307@intel.com> References: <1381493941-4650-1-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <1381493941-4650-6-git-send-email-tianyu.lan@intel.com> <20131016235541.GD17866@google.com> <525F7F0F.5010306@intel.com> <52612D1C.4070701@intel.com> <20131023223904.GA18454@google.com> <526BF37E.8040801@intel.com> <5270C47C.5040206@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Tony Luck , Len Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Yinghai Lu , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "Yoknis, Mike" , "Pearson, Greg" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On 2013=E5=B9=B410=E6=9C=8831=E6=97=A5 00:23, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Lan Tianyu wr= ote: >> On 2013=E5=B9=B410=E6=9C=8829=E6=97=A5 01:32, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Lan Tianyu = wrote: >>>> >>>> On 10/24/2013 06:39 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 08:44:12PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 10/18/2013 04:33 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>> I wonder if it would make sense to make >>>>>>> acpi_dev_resource_address_space() ignore addr.translation_offse= t for >>>>>>> IO resources. Or maybe ignore it if the _TTP (type translation= ) bit >>>>>>> is set? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder why current code doesn't check _TTP? The code in the >>>>>> add_io_space() seems to think _TTP is always set, right? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I think it's an oversight, and you should fix it. I suggest that= you >>>>> ignore the _TRA value when _TTP is set. Obviously this only appl= ies >>>>> to I/O port resources, since _TTP is only defined in the I/O Reso= urce >>>>> Flag (Table 6-185 in ACPI 5.0 spec). >>>> >>>> >>>> _TTP is also defined in the Memory Resource flag, Please have a lo= ok at >>>> Table 6-184 in the ACPI 5.0 Spec. >>> >>> >>> Yes, you're right. That would be for a host bridge that converts I= /O >>> on the primary (upstream) side of the bridge to memory on the PCI >>> side. I've never seen such a bridge, and I can't really imagine wh= y >>> anybody would do that. But I guess you should be able to safely >>> ignore _TRA when _TTP is set in either a MEM or IO descriptor, beca= use >>> the same reasoning should apply to both. >>> >>>> I am not sure how to deal with _TTP unsetting io resource? _TTP un= setting >>>> mean the resource is IO on the primary side and also IO on the sec= ondary >>>> side. >>> >>> >>> If _TTP is not set, I guess you would apply _TRA. That's what you >>> already do for MEM descriptors, and think you should just do the sa= me >>> for IO descriptors. I would guess that having _TTP =3D 0 and _TRA = !=3D 0 >>> is rare for IO descriptors, but I suppose it could happen. >> >> >> Yes, my concern is for the IO resource case of _TTP=3D0 and _TRA !=3D= 0. The >> only reason for this case I think of is that the IO resource offsets= on >> the prime bus and second bus are different. In this case, we still n= eed >> to pass _TRA to new_space() and the finial resource->start still sho= uld be >> acpi_resource->min + offset returned by add_io_space(), right? >=20 > No, I don't think so. If the "phys_base" argument to new_space() is > non-zero, it is the base of an MMIO region that needs to be > ioremapped. This is handling the _TTP=3D1 case, where the MMIO regio= n > is translated by the bridge into an IO region on PCI. >=20 > If _TTP=3D0, the region is IO on both the upstream and downstream sid= es > of the host bridge, and we don't want to ioremap a new MMIO region fo= r > it. It might be part of the "legacy I/O port space," but that's > already covered elsewhere. >=20 > I don't think we need to add special handling for the _TTP=3D0 and _T= RA > !=3D 0 case because I don't think it exists in the field. If and whe= n > it *does* exist, we'll know what to do. In the meantime, it should > look just like the MEM path. OK. I get it. acpi_dev_resource_address_space() will only apply _TRA to resource ->start and ->end for both mem and io resource when _TTP=3D0. = In the add_window(), the offset returned by add_io_space() will be added directly to ->start and ->end. add_window() { ... if (resource->flags & IORESOURCE_MEM) { root =3D &iomem_resource; offset =3D addr.translation_offset; } else if (resource->flags & IORESOURCE_IO) { root =3D &ioport_resource; offset =3D add_io_space(info, &addr); if (offset =3D=3D ~0) return AE_OK; resource->start +=3D offset; resource->end +=3D offset; } else return AE_OK; ... } >=20 >> If yes, I think _TRA can't be applied to IO resource in the >> acpi_dev_resource_address_space() regardless of the value of _TTP. >> >> BTW, Translation Sparse(_TRS) is only meaningful if _TTP is set.(Tab= le >> 6-185). The add_io_space() doesn't check _TTP when set sparse. So th= is >> should be corrected? >=20 > Sure, I'm OK with this. It's possible we could trip over a BIOS bug > where _TRS=3D1 but _TTP=3D0, but I think the risk is low because only > large ia64 boxes would use this, and there aren't very many of those. >=20 Ok. I will add a check for _TTP before setting sparse. Something likes = this. add_io_space() { =2E.. if (addr->info.io.translation =3D=3D ACPI_TYPE_TRANSLATION && addr->info.io.translation_type =3D=3D ACPI_SPARSE_TRANSLATION) sparse =3D 1; =2E.. } > Bjorn >=20 --=20 Best regards Tianyu Lan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html