From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: introduce common pci config space accessors
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2015 10:16:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2224125.SvyFyDvrch@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1420424374-32412-1-git-send-email-robh@kernel.org>
On Sunday 04 January 2015 20:19:34 Rob Herring wrote:
> Many PCI controllers' configuration space accesses are memory mapped
> varying only in address calculation and access checks. There are 2 main
> access methods: a decoded address space such as ECAM or a single address
> and data register similar to x86. This implementation can support both
> cases as well as be used in cases that need additional pre or post access
> handling.
>
> A new pci_ops member map_bus is introduced which can do access checks and
> any necessary setup. It returns the address to use for the configuration
> space access. The access types supported are 32-bit only accesses or
> correct byte, word, or dword sized accesses.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
I think this looks very nice, and I don't mind using it as-is, but I'd
like to put up some variations for discussions so we get the best
implementation -- we should try not to change it again soon if someone
comes up with a slightly better way later ;-)
> I've converted a few drivers already. I'll send patches for them after
> some feedback on this. Most already have some function similar to what is
> needed for map_bus, so the conversion is pretty simple. This certainly
> isn't a complete list of possible users. The diffstat so far looks like
> this:
>
> arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/pcie.c | 46 +++-------------------
> arch/arm/mach-integrator/pci_v3.c | 61 +++---------------------------
> arch/arm/mach-ks8695/pci.c | 75 +++---------------------------------
> arch/arm/mach-sa1100/pci-nanoengine.c | 94 ++++-----------------------------------------
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powermac/pci.c | 206 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_pci.c | 46 ++--------------------
> drivers/pci/host/pci-host-generic.c | 51 ++-----------------------
> drivers/pci/host/pci-rcar-gen2.c | 51 ++-----------------------
> drivers/pci/host/pci-tegra.c | 55 ++-------------------------
> drivers/pci/host/pci-xgene.c | 150 +++++-------------------------------------------------------------------
> drivers/pci/host/pcie-xilinx.c | 88 +++++-------------------------------------
> 11 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 830 deletions(-)
Awesome!
> +int pci_generic_config_read(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn,
> + int where, int size, u32 *val)
> +{
> + void __iomem *addr;
> +
> + addr = bus->ops->map_bus(bus, devfn, where);
> + if (!addr) {
> + *val = ~0;
> + return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
> + }
> +
> + if (size == 1)
> + *val = readb(addr);
> + else if (size == 2)
> + *val = readw(addr);
> + else
> + *val = readl(addr);
> +
> + return PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL;
> +}
PCI host controller drivers can be loadable modules these days, so
the functions clearly need to be exported.
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index 360a966..e7fd519 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -560,6 +560,7 @@ static inline int pcibios_err_to_errno(int err)
> /* Low-level architecture-dependent routines */
>
> struct pci_ops {
> + void __iomem *(*map_bus)(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int where);
> int (*read)(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32 *val);
> int (*write)(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, int where, int size, u32 val);
> };
In various other contexts, we have recently discussed adding new callbacks
to struct pci_host_bridge, or an operations structure below it. I don't see
a strong reason for one place or the other, but maybe someone else does.
If we put it into pci_host_bridge_ops, the first argument would need to
be the pci_host_bridge pointer of course.
For the common map_bus implementations, it would also be nice to put them
into the same file as your new access functions, but then we need a common
location to store at least one __iomem pointer. I guess that place could
either be struct pci_host_bridge or struct pci_bus. In theory, struct pci_ops
would work too, but then we could no longer mark it 'const' in host bridge
drivers.
If we have a common set of map_bus functions, we can even export the
pci_ops structures from drivers/pci/access.c:
const struct pci_ops pci_generic_ecam_ops = {
.map_bus = ecam_map_bus,
.read = pci_generic_config_read,
.write = pci_generic_config_write,
};
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_generic_ecam_ops);
That could of course be done in a follow-up patch, it doesn't have to be
part of your patch, but it would be good to be prepared.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-05 9:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-05 2:19 [PATCH] pci: introduce common pci config space accessors Rob Herring
2015-01-05 9:16 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2015-01-05 14:46 ` Rob Herring
2015-01-05 20:01 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-05 22:28 ` Rob Herring
2015-01-06 20:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-01-05 18:48 ` Andreas Mohr
2015-01-05 19:26 ` Rob Herring
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=2224125.SvyFyDvrch@wuerfel \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).