Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
To: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com,
	manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, robh@kernel.org,
	bhelgaas@google.com, jingoohan1@gmail.com,
	thomas.richard@bootlin.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v6 3/5] PCI: cadence: Use common PCI host bridge APIs for finding the capabilities
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 22:47:42 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <de6ce71c-ba82-496e-9c72-7c9c61b37906@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f2725090-e199-493d-9ae3-e807d65f647b@163.com>



On 2025/3/25 20:16, Hans Zhang wrote:
>>>>>> I'm really wondering why the read config function is provided 
>>>>>> directly
>>>>>> as
>>>>>> an argument. Shouldn't struct pci_host_bridge have some ops that can
>>>>>> read
>>>>>> config so wouldn't it make much more sense to pass it and use the 
>>>>>> func
>>>>>> from there? There seems to ops in pci_host_bridge that has read(), 
>>>>>> does
>>>>>> that work? If not, why?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No effect.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what you meant?
>>>>
>>>>> Because we need to get the offset of the capability before PCIe
>>>>> enumerates the device.
>>>>
>>>> Is this to say it is needed before the struct pci_host_bridge is 
>>>> created?
>>>>
>>>>> I originally added a separate find capability related
>>>>> function for CDNS in the following patch. It's also copied directly 
>>>>> from
>>>>> DWC.
>>>>> Mani felt there was too much duplicate code and also suggested 
>>>>> passing a
>>>>> callback function that could manipulate the registers of the root 
>>>>> port of
>>>>> DWC
>>>>> or CDNS.
>>>>
>>>> I very much like the direction this patchset is moving (moving shared
>>>> part of controllers code to core), I just feel this doesn't go far 
>>>> enough
>>>> when it's passing function pointer to the read function.
>>>>
>>>> I admit I've never written a controller driver so perhaps there's
>>>> something detail I lack knowledge of but I'd want to understand why
>>>> struct pci_ops (which exists both in pci_host_bridge and pci_bus) 
>>>> cannot
>>>> be used?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't know if the following code can make it clear to you.
>>>
>>> static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops qcom_pcie_dw_ops = {
>>>     .host_init    = qcom_pcie_host_init,
>>>                    pcie->cfg->ops->post_init(pcie);
>>>                      qcom_pcie_post_init_2_3_3
>>>                        dw_pcie_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_EXP);
>>> };
>>>
>>> int dw_pcie_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
>>>    bridge = devm_pci_alloc_host_bridge(dev, 0);
>>
>> It does this almost immediately:
>>
>>      bridge->ops = &dw_pcie_ops;
>>
>> Can we like add some function into those ops such that the necessary read
>> can be performed? Like .early_root_config_read or something like that?
>>
>> Then the host bridge capability finder can input struct pci_host_bridge
>> *host_bridge and can do 
>> host_bridge->ops->early_root_cfg_read(host_bridge,
>> ...). That would already be a big win over passing the read function
>> itself as a pointer.
>>
>> Hopefully having such a function in the ops would allow moving other
>> common controller driver functionality into PCI core as well as it would
>> abstract the per controller read function (for the time before everything
>> is fully instanciated).
>>
>> Is that a workable approach?
>>
> 
> I'll try to add and test it in your way first.
> 
> Another problem here is that I've seen some drivers invoke 
> dw_pcie_find_*capability before if (pp->ops->init) {. When I confirm it, 
> or I'll see if I can cover all the issues.
> 
> If I pass the test, I will provide the temporary patch here, please 
> check whether it is OK, and then submit the next version. If not, we'll 
> discuss it.
> 

Hi Ilpo,

Another question comes to mind:
If working in EP mode, devm_pci_alloc_host_bridge will not be executed 
and there will be no struct pci_host_bridge.

Don't know if you have anything to add?

> Thank you very much for your advice.
> 
>>>    if (pp->ops->host_init)
>>>      pp->ops = &qcom_pcie_dw_ops;  // qcom here needs to find capability
>>>
>>>    pci_host_probe(bridge); // pcie enumerate flow
>>>      pci_scan_root_bus_bridge(bridge);
>>>        pci_register_host_bridge(bridge);
>>>          bus->ops = bridge->ops;   // Only pci bus ops can be used
>>>
>>>

Best regards,
Hans


  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-25 14:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-23 16:48 [v6 0/5] Introduce generic capability search functions Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 16:48 ` [v6 1/5] PCI: " Hans Zhang
2025-03-24 13:28   ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-24 14:39     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-24 14:52       ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-25  2:58         ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-27 16:57   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-03-28  9:41     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-27 16:58   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-03-28  9:42     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 16:48 ` [v6 2/5] PCI: dwc: Use common PCI host bridge APIs for finding the capabilities Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 16:48 ` [v6 3/5] PCI: cadence: " Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 18:33   ` kernel test robot
2025-03-24  1:07     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 19:26   ` kernel test robot
2025-03-24  1:08     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-24 13:44   ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-24 14:29     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-24 15:02       ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-25  2:59         ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-25 11:15           ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-25 12:16             ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-25 14:47               ` Hans Zhang [this message]
2025-03-25 15:18                 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-25 15:37                   ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-28 10:33                     ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-28 11:42                       ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-03-29 16:03                         ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-31 16:39                           ` Ilpo Järvinen
2025-04-01 13:20                             ` Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 16:48 ` [v6 4/5] PCI: cadence: Use cdns_pcie_find_*capability to avoid hardcode Hans Zhang
2025-03-23 16:48 ` [v6 5/5] MAINTAINERS: Add entry for PCI host controller helpers Hans Zhang
2025-03-27 17:01   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-03-28 10:36     ` Hans Zhang

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=de6ce71c-ba82-496e-9c72-7c9c61b37906@163.com \
    --to=18255117159@163.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
    --cc=kw@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=thomas.richard@bootlin.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