From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f176.google.com (mail-pg1-f176.google.com [209.85.215.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ADC93A1BE for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 18:02:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="z6z/V6Io" Received: by mail-pg1-f176.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-5cdbc7bebecso2469324a12.1 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:02:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1704996148; x=1705600948; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cUCOtH2n97Hz0BIML6TxuTZ5JzlgVY5dhEjVoTSm1xA=; b=z6z/V6Io13JOEEZdBJfNHtbJ4+lTbq3R8+0KAsT+Iq8aX7H9BOHJnGvrWTwLzCHQ06 qe/nJcKoykQ6sXFEdcA1Jdw3YoJAzIwYXFEcW5Eb3h7Ou2PUitwAGr0VgpuPu8SsAA+m Lx+pPIKLRXrLdqg7nNsTK8eYxdAPDbbFcjnx8jF67z26NLzU8a83N8vPEMsj7USRhrFU 6wy/qlJRHaoel3F5Ln+nrPMoDTr/872/TGtAedTuMI9Wr3OuXUf6Mzv3+xnj2Gltqueu mrpFfS09axjJ7sXTlz5CoiKeOh16X3VzS8X81ru9JYy6NrYSnEGrr4u53fhaEPoay6cl i75A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704996148; x=1705600948; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=cUCOtH2n97Hz0BIML6TxuTZ5JzlgVY5dhEjVoTSm1xA=; b=LHGH0RLbFo/g9eN/wu2lJ9ehPB3V0XQMNaMVzfZeUJTFAoL+nfnjikfDLyWDeSkSlo Izs2MHZr2hGjoklHSCiecxr+rYPZtPgXhBxXfTYbLT3PEBaVJzUr8sWtcCdyZDX19vHe yReaoXU4V5KccnrTRTTeXUASUS3/fIWtNxm4pVkxPhJ4/3O4RjkNU3eIq9nlsp4iUAkA ptVYtpTD2hlX02abMH6VyeKR5pbuQsK9QTOTyZjTz++pJXbNOAXyIRelIfuQLxzhLZ2/ fvYMgBRYnsbuHTGlgEFvGvYOur+fMZze1cYXRFDNDPNixQBbP29LADB97GCdFXDYilBd RuOw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzB++Aoz6cvd52+Qn+DWjNx9j/LPx9SI8FZ5LPXxWssXuGvwk/S /oY9malcoH9Kl5aynP7zdMbySr52NWv/ X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHDjYbtlhhtXjts8IwQNaGvhbSFE46SidbUF0P1YlRIsmIR0dVqvteCf/ns8IiGqaTcP/Obcg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:368b:b0:28c:cfd8:92d0 with SMTP id mj11-20020a17090b368b00b0028ccfd892d0mr151069pjb.31.1704996147942; Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:02:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (108.93.126.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.126.93.108]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bb7-20020a170902bc8700b001d4e765f5efsm1425937plb.110.2024.01.11.10.02.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:02:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2024 23:32:18 +0530 From: Ajay Agarwal To: William McVicker Cc: Jingoo Han , Gustavo Pimentel , Manivannan Sadhasivam , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Rob Herring , Bjorn Helgaas , Manu Gautam , Sajid Dalvi , Serge Semin , Robin Murphy , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: dwc: Strengthen the MSI address allocation logic Message-ID: References: <20240111042103.392939-1-ajayagarwal@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 09:38:03AM -0800, William McVicker wrote: > Hi Ajay, > > Thanks for sending the patch! > > On 01/11/2024, 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 there is a memory region reserved for the pci->dev, pick up > > the MSI data from this region. This can be used by the platforms > > described above. > > > > Else, if the memory region is not reserved, 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 > > --- > > 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 | 50 ++++++++++++++----- > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c > > index 7991f0e179b2..8c7c77b49ca8 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c > > @@ -331,6 +331,8 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp) > > u64 *msi_vaddr; > > int ret; > > u32 ctrl, num_ctrls; > > + struct device_node *np; > > + struct resource r; > > > > for (ctrl = 0; ctrl < MAX_MSI_CTRLS; ctrl++) > > pp->irq_mask[ctrl] = ~0; > > @@ -374,20 +376,44 @@ static int dw_pcie_msi_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp) > > * order not to miss MSI TLPs from those devices the MSI target > > * address has to be within the lowest 4GB. > > * > > - * Note until there is a better alternative found the reservation is > > - * done by allocating from the artificially limited DMA-coherent > > - * memory. > > + * Check if there is memory region reserved for this device. If yes, > > + * pick up the msi_data from this region. This will be helpful for > > + * platforms that do not use/have 32-bit DMA addresses but want to use > > + * endpoints which support only 32-bit MSI address. > > + * Else, if the memory region is not reserved, try to allocate a 32-bit > > + * IOVA. Additionally, if this allocation also fails, attempt a 64-bit > > + * allocation. If the 64-bit MSI address is allocated, then the EPs > > + * supporting 32-bit MSI address will not work. > > */ > > - 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"); > > + np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "memory-region", 0); > > + if (np) { > > + ret = of_address_to_resource(np, 0, &r); > > + if (ret) { > > + dev_err(dev, "No memory address assigned to the region\n"); > > + return ret; > > + } > > > > - 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; > > + pp->msi_data = r.start; > > + } else { > > + dev_dbg(dev, "No %s specified\n", "memory-region"); > > + 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"); > > + > > + msi_vaddr = dmam_alloc_coherent(dev, sizeof(u64), &pp->msi_data, > > + GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!msi_vaddr) { > > + dev_warn(dev, "Failed to alloc 32-bit MSI data. Attempting 64-bit now\n"); > > + dma_set_coherent_mask(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); > > + 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; > > + } > > Should we just put this second if-check inside the above fallback? > Yeah, we can do that. Will fix it in the next version after waiting for comments from others. > > } > > > > return 0; > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h > > index 55ff76e3d384..c85cf4d56e98 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h > > @@ -317,6 +317,7 @@ struct dw_pcie_rp { > > phys_addr_t io_bus_addr; > > u32 io_size; > > int irq; > > + u8 coherent_dma_bits; > > const struct dw_pcie_host_ops *ops; > > int msi_irq[MAX_MSI_CTRLS]; > > struct irq_domain *irq_domain; > > Looks like this is a lingering change? Please drop. > Sorry about that. Will remove in the next version. > Thanks, > Will > > > -- > > 2.43.0.275.g3460e3d667-goog > >