linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
To: Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>
Cc: Pratyush Anand <pratyush.anand@gmail.com>,
	Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Wangzhou (B)" <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>,
	Yuanzhichang <yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com>,
	Zhudacai <zhudacai@hisilicon.com>,
	zhangjukuo <zhangjukuo@huawei.com>,
	qiuzhenfa <qiuzhenfa@hisilicon.com>,
	"Liguozhu (Kenneth)" <liguozhu@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write() and dw_pcie_cfg_read()
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:24:29 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAErSpo4hWUyaGrt3iTYffCxP0XHiR=DeZ8OEp9XnhAP3C8D+HQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EE11001F9E5DDD47B7634E2F8A612F2E1622BC36@lhreml503-mbb>

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Gabriele Paoloni
<gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com> wrote:
> Hi guys sorry for the late reply I have been OOO for the last 5 days
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pratyush Anand [mailto:pratyush.anand@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 4:04 AM
>> To: Bjorn Helgaas
>> Cc: Gabriele Paoloni; Jingoo Han; linux-pci@vger.kernel.org; Wangzhou
>> (B); Yuanzhichang; Zhudacai; zhangjukuo; qiuzhenfa; Liguozhu (Kenneth)
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write()
>> and dw_pcie_cfg_read()
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 2:16 AM, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 05:38:26PM +0800, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
>> >> From: gabriele paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>
>> >>
>> >> This patch changes the implementation of dw_pcie_cfg_read() and
>> >> dw_pcie_cfg_write() to improve the function usage from the callers
>> >> perspective.
>> >> Currently the callers are obliged to pass the 32bit aligned address
>> >> of the register that contains the field of the PCI header that they
>> >> want to read/write; also they have to pass the offset of the field
>> >> in that register. This is quite tricky to use as the callers are
>> >> obliged to sum the PCI header base address to the field offset
>> >> masked to retrieve the 32b aligned register address.
>> >>
>> >> With the new API the callers have to pass the base address of the
>> >> PCI header and the offset corresponding to the field they intend to
>> >> read/write.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>
>> >
>> >
>> >>  int dw_pcie_cfg_read(void __iomem *addr, int where, int size, u32
>> *val)
>> >>  {
>> >> +     addr += (where & ~0x3);
>> >>       *val = readl(addr);
>> >> +     where &= 3;
>> >>
>> >>       if (size == 1)
>> >> -             *val = (*val >> (8 * (where & 3))) & 0xff;
>> >> +             *val = (*val >> (8 * where)) & 0xff;
>> >>       else if (size == 2)
>> >> -             *val = (*val >> (8 * (where & 3))) & 0xffff;
>> >> +             *val = (*val >> (8 * where)) & 0xffff;
>> >>       else if (size != 4)
>> >>               return PCIBIOS_BAD_REGISTER_NUMBER;
>> >>
>> >> @@ -96,12 +98,14 @@ int dw_pcie_cfg_read(void __iomem *addr, int
>> where, int size, u32 *val)
>> >>
>> >>  int dw_pcie_cfg_write(void __iomem *addr, int where, int size, u32
>> val)
>> >>  {
>> >> +     addr += where;
>> >> +
>> >>       if (size == 4)
>> >>               writel(val, addr);
>> >>       else if (size == 2)
>> >> -             writew(val, addr + (where & 2));
>> >> +             writew(val, addr);
>> >>       else if (size == 1)
>> >> -             writeb(val, addr + (where & 3));
>> >> +             writeb(val, addr);
>> >>       else
>> >>               return PCIBIOS_BAD_REGISTER_NUMBER;
>> >
>> > I just noticed the asymmetry between dw_pcie_cfg_read() and
>> > dw_pcie_cfg_write(): in dw_pcie_cfg_read() we always do 32-bit reads
>> and
>> > mask out the parts we won't want, but in dw_pcie_cfg_write() we do 8-,
>> 16-,
>> > or 32-byte writes.
>> >
>> > That was there even before your patch, but I wonder why.  Either both
>> > should work the same way, or there should be a comment explaining why
>> they
>> > are different.
>> >
>> > Jingoo, Pratyush?
>>
>> As I said earlier, I just vaguely remember that there was some issue
>> with a SOC in reading non word aligned addresses.
>> (1) I do not have any reference for it and (2) even if some where
>> there could be such issue they can always have platform specific
>> accessor . So I support your idea and both read and write can be made
>> symmetric.
>
> I agree with the idea but, what if doing so we break other drivers?
> Is the correct flow to break them first and let the single maintainers fix them then...?

Since we don't know which (if any) systems would break, I think the
best we can do is see if anybody has objections, then put it in and
see if anything breaks.

Bjorn

  reply	other threads:[~2015-09-23 16:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-11  9:38 [PATCH v3 0/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write() and dw_pcie_cfg_read() Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-11  9:38 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] PCIe: SPEAr13xx: fix dw_pcie_cfg_read/write() usage Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-11  9:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write() and dw_pcie_cfg_read() Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-18 20:46   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-19  3:03     ` Pratyush Anand
2015-09-23 16:20       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-23 16:24         ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2015-09-23 16:26           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-18 20:53   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2015-09-19  3:11     ` Pratyush Anand
2015-09-23 16:26       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-11  9:38 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] PCI: designware: add sanity checks on the header offset in dw_pcie_cfg_read and dw_pcie_cfg_write Gabriele Paoloni
2015-09-15  9:28 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] PCI: designware: change dw_pcie_cfg_write() and dw_pcie_cfg_read() Gabriele Paoloni

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='CAErSpo4hWUyaGrt3iTYffCxP0XHiR=DeZ8OEp9XnhAP3C8D+HQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com \
    --cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
    --cc=liguozhu@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pratyush.anand@gmail.com \
    --cc=qiuzhenfa@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=wangzhou1@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=zhangjukuo@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhudacai@hisilicon.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).