Re: [PATCH v5 03/14] PCI: cadence: Convert all r/w accessors to perform only 32-bit accesses

Rob Herring
2020-05-26T15:13:06Z

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:30 PM Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rob,
>
> On 5/22/2020 9:24 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 9:37 PM Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Certain platforms like TI's J721E using Cadence PCIe IP can perform only
> >> 32-bit accesses for reading or writing to Cadence registers. Convert all
> >> read and write accesses to 32-bit in Cadence PCIe driver in preparation
> >> for adding PCIe support in TI's J721E SoC.
> >
> > Looking more closely I don't think cdns_pcie_ep_assert_intx is okay
> > with this and never can be given the PCI_COMMAND and PCI_STATUS
> > registers are in the same word (IIRC, that's the main reason 32-bit
> > config space accesses are broken). So this isn't going to work at
>
> right, PCI_STATUS has write '1' to clear bits and there's a chance that it
> could be reset while raising legacy interrupt. While this cannot be avoided for
> TI's J721E, other platforms doesn't have to have this limitation.
> > least for EP accesses. And maybe you need a custom .raise_irq() hook
> > to minimize any problems (such as making the RMW atomic at least from
> > the endpoint's perspective).
>
> This is to make sure EP doesn't update in-consistent state when RC is updating
> the PCI_STATUS register? Since this involves two different systems, how do we
> make this atomic?

You can't make it atomic WRT both systems, but is there locking around
each RMW? Specifically, are preemption and interrupts disabled to
ensure time between a read and write are minimized? You wouldn't want
interrupts disabled during the delay too though (i.e. around
.raise_irq()).

BTW, I've asked this question before, but aren't PCI legacy interrupts
level triggered? If so, isn't generating a pulse wrong?

Rob