From: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@st.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Gabriel FERNANDEZ <gabriel.fernandez@st.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@st.com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@st.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com>,
Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@osg.samsung.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>,
Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>,
Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@renesas.com>,
Minghuan Lian <Minghuan>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] pci: designware: remove pci_common_init_dev()
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 16:28:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <556331A7.60909@st.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150506192201.GF24643@google.com>
Hi Bjorn,
On 05/06/2015 09:22 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> It's not completely obvious that replacing pci_common_init_dev() with
> dw_pcie_setup() is equivalent. Here are my notes from trying to convince
> myself that this is correct. I think your changelog could stand some
> enhancement. It would be ideal if you could break this into a few smaller
> patches that were more obviously correct, but I suspect it's too
> intertwined to do that.
Thanks you for your review !
Sorry for the late reply, from your detailed analysis bellow, yes, it
looks like pci_common_init_dev isn't
completely equivalent.
I'm wondering about PCI_PROBE_ONLY flag...
The idea in the first place, to move to generic probing directly, instead of
pci_common_init_dev() was to avoid being assigned default I/O (e.g. in
bios32.c).
Please refer to discussion with Arnd :
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015-January/317726.html
But, I don't see how to be fully compatible (e.g. ARM specific option
like PCI_PROBE_ONLY)
without calling pci_common_init_dev() or duplicating code from bios32.c.
Maybe should I fall back to the first idea of using specifc handling of
an "empty" IO space, and keep pci_common_init_dev() ?
Please advise,
BR,
Fabrice
> Here's an outline of pci_common_init_dev():
>
> pci_common_init_dev(parent, hw)
> pci_add_flags(PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_RSRC) # [1]
> if (hw->preinit)
> hw->preinit # [2]
> pcibios_init_hw
> for (nr = 0; nr < hw->nr_controllers; # [3]
> sys = kzalloc # [4]
> sys->msi_ctrl = hw->msi_ctrl # [5]
> sys->busnr = busnr # [6]
> sys->swizzle = hw->swizzle # [7]
> sys->map_irq = hw->map_irq # [8]
> sys->align_resource = hw->align_resource # [9]
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&sys->resources) # [10]
> sys->private_data = hw->private_data # [11]
> hw->setup # [12]
> pcibios_init_resources # [13]
> hw->scan # [14]
> if (hw->postinit)
> hw->postinit # [15]
> pci_fixup_irqs # [16]
> list_for_each_entry(sys, &head, # [17]
> if (!pci_has_flag(PCI_PROBE_ONLY)) # [18]
> pci_bus_size_bridges # [19]
> pci_bus_assign_resources
> pci_bus_add_devices
> list_for_each_entry(sys, &head,
> ...
> pcie_bus_configure_settings # [20]
>
> [1] You don't set PCI_REASSIGN_ALL_RSRC; have you verified that nobody
> cares about that?
>
> [2] dw_pci.preinit was NULL, so skipping this doesn't matter; looks OK.
>
> [3] dw_pci.nr_controllers was always 1, so skipping the loop doesn't
> matter; looks OK.
>
> [4] You added struct pci_sys_data sysdata as a member of struct
> pcie_port, so it is now allocated by dw_pcie_host_init() callers, e.g.,
> st_pcie_probe(); looks OK.
>
> [5] You set pp->sysdata.msi_ctrl in dw_pcie_host_init() instead of
> pcibios_init_hw(); looks OK.
>
> [6] Since dw_pci.nr_controllers was always 1, sys->busnr was always 0.
> You don't set sys->busnr, so it will retain its initial zero value. OK, I
> guess. It's still a little broken that we have both pp->busn and
> pp->sysdata.busnr, but you didn't break it and it's OK that you didn't
> change anything in this regard.
>
> [7] dw_pci.swizzle was NULL, so pcibios_swizzle() would default to
> pci_common_swizzle(), which is what you use when you call pci_fixup_irqs()
> in dw_pcie_scan_bus(); looks OK.
>
> [8] dw_pci.map_irq was dw_pcie_map_irq() (which used
> of_irq_parse_and_map_pci()) and sys->map_irq was used by pcibios_map_irq().
> You call pci_fixup_irqs() and pass a pointer to of_irq_parse_and_map_pci();
> looks OK.
>
> [9] dw_pci.align_resource was NULL, and I assume
> pcie_port.sysdata.align_resource was initialized to zeroes; looks OK.
>
> [10] You call INIT_LIST_HEAD() in dw_pcie_host_init() instead of
> pcibios_init_hw(); looks OK.
>
> [11] You set sys->private_data in dw_pcie_host_init() instead of
> pcibios_init_hw(); looks OK.
>
> [12] dw_pci.setup was dw_pcie_setup(), and you call that from
> dw_pcie_host_init(); looks OK.
>
> [13] You no longer call pcibios_init_resources(). You don't want the
> default I/O space, which makes sense; looks OK (but you need to audit other
> users and make sure they don't need it either).
>
> [14] dw_pci.scan was dw_pcie_scan_bus(), and you call that from
> dw_pcie_host_init(); looks OK.
>
> [15] dw_pci.postinit was NULL, so skipping this doesn't matter; looks OK.
>
> [16] You call pci_fixup_irqs() from dw_pcie_scan_bus() instead of
> pci_common_init_dev(); looks OK.
>
> [17] "head" is a local list in pci_common_init_dev(), and you don't need
> anything similar because dw_pcie_host_init() is called once per host
> bridge; looks OK.
>
> [18] You don't test PCI_PROBE_ONLY; it looks like it can still be set by
> booting with "pci=firmware". So previously, "pci=firmware" prevented
> resource assignment, but it no longer does. Is that right? Is that what
> you intend?
>
> [19] Instead of pci_bus_size_bridges() and pci_bus_assign_resources(), you
> call pci_assign_unassigned_bus_resources() from dw_pcie_scan_bus(). That
> seems like an improvement because it holds pci_bus_sem and supplies
> add_list; looks OK.
>
> [20] I think you no longer call pcie_bus_configure_settings(). That
> configured MPS settings, and I think you still want to do that, don't you?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-25 14:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-10 9:12 [PATCH v3 0/5] PCI: st: provide support for dw pcie Gabriel FERNANDEZ
2015-04-10 9:12 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] ARM: STi: Kconfig update for PCIe support Gabriel FERNANDEZ
[not found] ` <1428657168-12495-1-git-send-email-gabriel.fernandez-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2015-04-10 9:12 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] PCI: st: Add Device Tree bindings for sti pcie Gabriel FERNANDEZ
2015-05-05 22:09 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-04-10 9:12 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] PCI: st: Provide support for the sti PCIe controller Gabriel FERNANDEZ
2015-04-11 10:17 ` Paul Bolle
2015-04-11 14:55 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-13 7:35 ` Gabriel Fernandez
2015-05-05 22:16 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-06 9:14 ` Gabriel Fernandez
[not found] ` <CAG374jAv9aHBPGV+x+xs2MyRGz+fw1ymwu78fqNXDPtPqehgZA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-05-06 9:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-05-06 13:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-06 13:40 ` Gabriel Fernandez
[not found] ` <CAG374jCfo1165cbMrip5SrYigjNkXPyc-dqgmRbTQ0Yaw3wmDA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-05-06 15:33 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-04-10 9:12 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] pci: designware: remove pci_common_init_dev() Gabriel FERNANDEZ
2015-05-06 19:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-25 14:28 ` Fabrice Gasnier [this message]
2015-04-10 9:12 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Add pci-st.c to ARCH/STI architecture Gabriel FERNANDEZ
2015-05-05 21:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-05-06 6:45 ` Maxime Coquelin
2015-08-14 14:53 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] PCI: st: provide support for dw pcie Bjorn Helgaas
2015-08-17 7:53 ` Gabriel Fernandez
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=556331A7.60909@st.com \
--to=fabrice.gasnier@st.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gabriel.fernandez@st.com \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
--cc=jg1.han@samsung.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=kishon@ti.com \
--cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@st.com \
--cc=mchehab@osg.samsung.com \
--cc=patrice.chotard@st.com \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=phil.edworthy@renesas.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).