From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from m16.mail.163.com (m16.mail.163.com [117.135.210.4]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 571213234; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 15:51:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=117.135.210.4 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739548299; cv=none; b=oOdeob9aZsb93+rorVY7RE5dNBWEpC8jY/d/dZqFzq3RkXsri1xtQSItNqsE/hFnnazib2mCrtmNSSq2J4SMEXhXoRUjjECduvXXPLK+5cbHSpeSLu6gMnlUNSOQ+vGjBLWd5X+BGPipAm9LLSygUg3D9ym2rgOvXnruq24yCmI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1739548299; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IDTr1Eq3cziq+DUkNqSv2uD2a5GpF3XqUFMvXRcIcAM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=gQk9OVcIclWOSdeIuj/Rg8WF0NSPYfJc1iqrp1gqyBv0SxjRVni/MDzy3LTVrwU07yFP+p74Bdna3ZM3rC/M3qb1jg2h8ensPW9MHp202oaTaea41lpmSc3oXcX+7c4etq2ifRoOvZIJpypgtO2EOD3pr3OZE/yEX3lw0I56FaA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b=cOgvKaT2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=117.135.210.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b="cOgvKaT2" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=163.com; s=s110527; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:From: Content-Type; bh=ifmXkuEVqR4hvNL7Ti3tLm85mmbETlFEp0sPfcah6gI=; b=cOgvKaT21pxQzx1r0FRbiRUvxkkM0LYZvifYm1R9KLN5V3jr2UcS4qloeWdFS7 eTAiuA/1wupeLxloNnxZFm9Sdh3rUdAhH/6SoOfa2bgY5ACeNtDPzTkBdTNjsaCa oXLM5gs+r/tEjHuy8rCrYAKjYh6fpRzLA1xiSewHp0AxI= Received: from [192.168.71.44] (unknown []) by gzga-smtp-mtada-g1-2 (Coremail) with SMTP id _____wC3+S_AZa9nvmfeMA--.26732S2; Fri, 14 Feb 2025 23:48:17 +0800 (CST) Message-ID: <3d3d8772-08ba-4e5a-bf1f-71821cf056e7@163.com> Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 23:48:16 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [v3] PCI: cadence: Fix sending message with data or without data To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: Manivannan Sadhasivam , lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, robh@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, bwawrzyn@cisco.com, cassel@kernel.org, wojciech.jasko-EXT@continental-corporation.com, a-verma1@ti.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rockswang7@gmail.com References: <20250207103923.32190-1-18255117159@163.com> <20250214073030.4vckeq2hf6wbb4ez@thinkpad> <7eb9fedc-67c9-4886-9470-d747273f136c@163.com> <20250214132115.fpiqq65tqtowl2wa@thinkpad> <332ec463-ebd9-477c-8b10-157887343225@163.com> <20250214153103.4cjlawksw4xobc2l@thinkpad> Content-Language: en-US From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com> In-Reply-To: <20250214153103.4cjlawksw4xobc2l@thinkpad> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CM-TRANSID:_____wC3+S_AZa9nvmfeMA--.26732S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvJXoW7ur18JFyxCw1rAF1UGw4fGrg_yoW8Xr1kpa 9xKa4Skws5KrZYvF1xZr1IqrnrGFWfXa15Cry8ZryFyws09FyFkryIka1jga4rGw1rAFWY vryjgFZrAa12vFDanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDUYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07UVMKtUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: rpryjkyvrrlimvzbiqqrwthudrp/1tbiDwTzo2evZK4OwQAAsW On 2025/2/14 23:31, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 10:28:11PM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote: >> Sorry Mani, I shouldn't have spread this SOC bug. This is a bug in RTL >> design, the WSTRB signal of AXI bus is not connected correctly, so the first >> generation SOC cannot send message, because we mainly use RC mode, and we >> cannot send PME_Turn_OFF, that is, our SOC does not support L2. I have no >> choice about this, I entered the company relatively late, and our SOC has >> already TO. > > Ok. Just to clear my head, this patch is needed irrespective of the hw issue, > right? And with or without this patch, first revision hw cannot send any MSG > TLPs? Yes, that was a problem with our own SOC design, the Cadence RTL bug. > If so, it is fine. But is there a way we could detect those first generation IPs > and flag it to users about broken MSG TLP support? Atleast, that would make the > users aware of broken hw. I don't know how to do it, but here are the questions that were actually tested. >> >> This patch is to solve the Cadence common code bug, and does not conform to >> Cadence documentation. > > you mean 'does'? > What I mean is that common code bit16=1 is to send a message without data, while Cadence's development document says that bit16=0 is to send a message without data. This is not consistent with the documentation description, and the final verification results, the development documentation described is correct. Best regards Hans