From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: "Kobayashi,Daisuke" <kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com>
Cc: <kobayashi.da-06@jp.fujitsu.com>, <linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>,
<y-goto@fujitsu.com>, <mj@ucw.cz>, <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 1/2] cxl/core/regs: Add rcd_pcie_cap initialization
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 16:07:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240613160722.00000e67@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240612075940.92500-2-kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com>
On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 16:59:38 +0900
"Kobayashi,Daisuke" <kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Add rcd_pcie_cap and its initialization to cache the offset of cxl1.1
> device link status information. By caching it, avoid the walking
> memory map area to find the offset when output the register value.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Kobayashi,Daisuke" <kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com>
Getting close, but I a few PCI general things look like they are CXL
specific in here and we should fix that and some error handling
has ended up incorrect.
Jonathan
> ---
> drivers/cxl/core/core.h | 6 ++++
> drivers/cxl/core/regs.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> drivers/cxl/cxl.h | 10 +++++++
> drivers/cxl/pci.c | 4 ++-
> 4 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/core.h b/drivers/cxl/core/core.h
> index 3b64fb1b9ed0..e71600380a22 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/core.h
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/core.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,12 @@ resource_size_t __rcrb_to_component(struct device *dev,
> struct cxl_rcrb_info *ri,
> enum cxl_rcrb which);
> u16 cxl_rcrb_to_aer(struct device *dev, resource_size_t rcrb);
> +resource_size_t cxl_rcrb_to_linkcap(struct device *dev, struct cxl_dport *dport);
> +
> +#define PCI_RCRB_CAP_LIST_ID_MASK GENMASK(7, 0)
> +#define PCI_RCRB_CAP_HDR_ID_MASK GENMASK(7, 0)
> +#define PCI_RCRB_CAP_HDR_NEXT_MASK GENMASK(15, 8)
> +#define RCRB_PCIECAP_LEN 0x3c
this is normal PCI Express capability stuff. Currently PCI doesn't
have defines for these, bt I think that's an omission rather than a feature!
So __pci_find_next_cap_ttl() for instance should use masks to get the
various fields and those should be in include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h
I'd prefer to see that done as part of this patch set but we could move
form a local define in the c file, not this head to a global definition
in a future patch set.
I'd include a PCI_CAP_EXP_SIZEOF 0x3c
to be inline with the existing equivalents.
>
> extern struct rw_semaphore cxl_dpa_rwsem;
> extern struct rw_semaphore cxl_region_rwsem;
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c b/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> index 372786f80955..d86ac9c64e0c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/regs.c
> @@ -505,6 +505,68 @@ u16 cxl_rcrb_to_aer(struct device *dev, resource_size_t rcrb)
> return offset;
> }
>
> +resource_size_t cxl_rcrb_to_linkcap(struct device *dev, struct cxl_dport *dport)
> +{
> + resource_size_t rcrb = dport->rcrb.base;
> + void __iomem *addr;
> + u32 cap_hdr;
> + u16 offset;
> +
> + if (!request_mem_region(rcrb, SZ_4K, "CXL RCRB"))
> + return CXL_RESOURCE_NONE;
> +
> + addr = ioremap(rcrb, SZ_4K);
> + if (!addr) {
> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to map region %pr\n", addr);
> + release_mem_region(rcrb, SZ_4K);
> + return CXL_RESOURCE_NONE;
> + }
> +
> + offset = FIELD_GET(PCI_RCRB_CAP_LIST_ID_MASK, readw(addr + PCI_CAPABILITY_LIST));
> + cap_hdr = readl(addr + offset);
> + while ((FIELD_GET(PCI_RCRB_CAP_HDR_ID_MASK, cap_hdr)) != PCI_CAP_ID_EXP) {
> + offset = FIELD_GET(PCI_RCRB_CAP_HDR_NEXT_MASK, cap_hdr);
> + if (offset == 0 || offset > SZ_4K) {
> + offset = 0;
> + break;
> + }
> + cap_hdr = readl(addr + offset);
> + }
> + if (offset)
> + dport->rcrb.rcd_pcie_cap = offset;
> +
> + iounmap(addr);
> + release_mem_region(rcrb, SZ_4K);
> +
> + return offset;
> +}
> +
> +int cxl_dport_map_rcd_linkcap(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> +{
> + void __iomem *dport_pcie_cap = NULL;
> + struct cxl_port *port;
> + struct cxl_dport *dport;
> + struct cxl_rcrb_info *ri;
> + resource_size_t rcd_pcie_offset;
Local style thing: CXL tends to do reverse xmas tree.
> +
> + port = cxl_pci_find_port(pdev, &dport);
> + if (!port)
> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> +
> + cxl_rcrb_to_linkcap(&pdev->dev, dport);
> +
> + ri = &dport->rcrb;
> + if (dport->rcrb.rcd_pcie_cap) {
> + rcd_pcie_offset = ri->base + ri->rcd_pcie_cap;
> + dport_pcie_cap = devm_cxl_iomap_block(&pdev->dev, rcd_pcie_offset,
> + sizeof(u8) * RCRB_PCIECAP_LEN);
sizeof(u8) isn't particularly helpful so I'd drop that.
Is the PCIECAP a different length from normal? I'd drop the RCRB prefix if not.
> + }
> +
> + dport->regs.rcd_pcie_cap = dport_pcie_cap;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(cxl_dport_map_rcd_linkcap, CXL);
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/pci.c
> index 2ff361e756d6..8e7674c1b8f0 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/pci.c
> @@ -512,8 +512,10 @@ static int cxl_pci_setup_regs(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum cxl_regloc_type type,
> * is an RCH and try to extract the Component Registers from
> * an RCRB.
> */
> - if (rc && type == CXL_REGLOC_RBI_COMPONENT && is_cxl_restricted(pdev))
> + if (rc && type == CXL_REGLOC_RBI_COMPONENT && is_cxl_restricted(pdev)) {
> rc = cxl_rcrb_get_comp_regs(pdev, map);
If the above errored out we should not continue.
if (rc)
return rc;
> + cxl_dport_map_rcd_linkcap(pdev);
> + }
} else if (rc) {
return rc;
}
>
> if (rc)
> return rc;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-13 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-12 7:59 [PATCH v11 0/2] Export cxl1.1 device link status register value to pci device sysfs Kobayashi,Daisuke
2024-06-12 7:59 ` [PATCH v11 1/2] cxl/core/regs: Add rcd_pcie_cap initialization Kobayashi,Daisuke
2024-06-13 15:07 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-06-12 7:59 ` [PATCH v11 2/2] cxl/pci: Add sysfs attribute for CXL 1.1 device link status Kobayashi,Daisuke
2024-06-13 15:08 ` Jonathan Cameron
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=20240613160722.00000e67@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com \
--cc=kobayashi.da-06@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mj@ucw.cz \
--cc=y-goto@fujitsu.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