From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>
To: Ajay Agarwal <ajayagarwal@google.com>
Cc: "Jingoo Han" <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
"Gustavo Pimentel" <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
"Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Manu Gautam" <manugautam@google.com>,
"Sajid Dalvi" <sdalvi@google.com>,
"William McVicker" <willmcvicker@google.com>,
"Serge Semin" <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
"Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] PCI: dwc: Strengthen the MSI address allocation logic
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 12:38:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240214070842.GE4618@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240214053415.3360897-1-ajayagarwal@google.com>
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 11:04:15AM +0530, Ajay Agarwal wrote:
> There can be platforms that do not use/have 32-bit DMA addresses
> but want to enumerate endpoints which support only 32-bit MSI
> address. The current implementation of 32-bit IOVA allocation can
> fail for such platforms, eventually leading to the probe failure.
>
> If the vendor driver has already setup the MSI address using
> some mechanism, use the same. This method can be used by the
> platforms described above to support EPs they wish to. Such
> drivers should set the DW_PCIE_CAP_MSI_DATA_SET flag.
>
> Else, try to allocate a 32-bit IOVA. Additionally, if this
> allocation also fails, attempt a 64-bit allocation for probe to
> be successful. If the 64-bit MSI address is allocated, then the
> EPs supporting 32-bit MSI address will not work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ajay Agarwal <ajayagarwal@google.com>
> ---
> Changelog since v3:
> - Add a new controller cap flag 'DW_PCIE_CAP_MSI_DATA_SET'
> - Refactor the comments and print statements
>
> Changelog since v2:
> - If the vendor driver has setup the msi_data, use the same
>
> Changelog since v1:
> - Use reserved memory, if it exists, to setup the MSI data
> - Fallback to 64-bit IOVA allocation if 32-bit allocation fails
>
> .../pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> index d5fc31f8345f..06ee2e5deebc 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> @@ -373,11 +373,17 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> * peripheral PCIe devices may lack 64-bit message support. In
> * order not to miss MSI TLPs from those devices the MSI target
> * address has to be within the lowest 4GB.
> + * Permit the platforms to override the MSI target address if they
> + * have a free PCIe-bus memory specifically reserved for that. Such
> + * platforms should set the 'DW_PCIE_CAP_MSI_DATA_SET' cap flag.
> *
> * Note until there is a better alternative found the reservation is
> * done by allocating from the artificially limited DMA-coherent
> * memory.
> */
Now the above comments are misplaced. Please move the comments related to
setting coherent mask just above the dma_set_coherent_mask() API and keep the
flag related comments here.
> + if (dw_pcie_cap_is(pci, MSI_DATA_SET))
Who is setting this flag? You should not add code when there are no in-kernel
consumers.
> + return 0;
> +
> ret = dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> if (ret)
> dev_warn(dev, "Failed to set DMA mask to 32-bit. Devices with only 32-bit MSI support may not work properly\n");
> @@ -385,9 +391,15 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> msi_vaddr = dmam_alloc_coherent(dev, sizeof(u64), &pp->msi_data,
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!msi_vaddr) {
> - dev_err(dev, "Failed to alloc and map MSI data\n");
> - dw_pcie_free_msi(pp);
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + dev_warn(dev, "Failed to configure 32-bit MSI address. Devices with only 32-bit MSI support may not work properly\n");
This is a duplicated error log.
> + dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
Is there a guarantee that this will never fail?
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-14 7:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-14 5:34 [PATCH v4] PCI: dwc: Strengthen the MSI address allocation logic Ajay Agarwal
2024-02-14 7:08 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam [this message]
2024-02-21 5:47 ` Ajay Agarwal
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=20240214070842.GE4618@thinkpad \
--to=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=ajayagarwal@google.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \
--cc=gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=kw@linux.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=manugautam@google.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=sdalvi@google.com \
--cc=willmcvicker@google.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