Re: [PATCH V8 7/9] acpi: Add generic MCFG table handling

Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-08T12:21:37Z

On 08.06.2016 03:56, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:14:20PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> In order to handle PCI config space regions properly in ACPI, new MCFG
>> interface is defined which does sanity checks on MCFG table and keeps its
>> root pointer. The user is able to lookup MCFG regions based on
>> host bridge root structure and domain:bus_start:bus_end touple.
>> Use pci_mmcfg_late_init old prototype to avoid another function name.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jayachandran C <jchandra@broadcom.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/Kconfig | 3 ++
>> drivers/acpi/Makefile | 1 +
>> drivers/acpi/pci_mcfg.c | 94 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/pci-acpi.h | 2 ++
>> include/linux/pci.h | 2 +-
>> 5 files changed, 101 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> create mode 100644 drivers/acpi/pci_mcfg.c
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> index b7e2e77..f98c328 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Kconfig
>> @@ -217,6 +217,9 @@ config ACPI_PROCESSOR_IDLE
>> bool
>> select CPU_IDLE
>>
>> +config ACPI_MCFG
>> + bool
>> +
>> config ACPI_CPPC_LIB
>> bool
>> depends on ACPI_PROCESSOR
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/Makefile b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> index 251ce85..632e81f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/Makefile
>> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ acpi-$(CONFIG_ARCH_MIGHT_HAVE_ACPI_PDC) += processor_pdc.o
>> acpi-y += ec.o
>> acpi-$(CONFIG_ACPI_DOCK) += dock.o
>> acpi-y += pci_root.o pci_link.o pci_irq.o
>> +obj-$(CONFIG_ACPI_MCFG) += pci_mcfg.o
>> acpi-y += acpi_lpss.o acpi_apd.o
>> acpi-y += acpi_platform.o
>> acpi-y += acpi_pnp.o
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pci_mcfg.c b/drivers/acpi/pci_mcfg.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..1847f74
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/pci_mcfg.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
>> +/*
>> + * Copyright (C) 2016 Broadcom
>> + * Author: Jayachandran C <jchandra@broadcom.com>
>> + * Copyright (C) 2016 Semihalf
>> + * Author: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
>> + *
>> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>> + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License, version 2, as
>> + * published by the Free Software Foundation (the "GPL").
>> + *
>> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
>> + * WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
>> + * General Public License version 2 (GPLv2) for more details.
>> + *
>> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
>> + * version 2 (GPLv2) along with this source code.
>> + */
>> +
>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "ACPI: " fmt
>> +
>> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
>> +#include <linux/pci.h>
>> +#include <linux/pci-acpi.h>
>> +
>> +/* Root pointer to the mapped MCFG table */
>> +static struct acpi_table_mcfg *mcfg_table;
>> +static int mcfg_entries;
>> +
>> +int pci_mcfg_lookup(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>
> I think this would be better if we passed in the domain and a pointer
> to the bus range resource and returned the ECAM base address. I don't
> think we need to be connected to struct acpi_pci_root.

I will use domain and bus range resource as you suggested.

>
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_mcfg_allocation *mptr, *entry = NULL;
>> + struct resource *bus_res = &root->secondary;
>> + int i;
>> +
>> + if (mcfg_table) {
>> + mptr = (struct acpi_mcfg_allocation *) &mcfg_table[1];
>> + for (i = 0; i < mcfg_entries && !entry; i++, mptr++)
>> + if (mptr->pci_segment == root->segment &&
>> + mptr->start_bus_number == bus_res->start)
>> + entry = mptr;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* not found, use _CBA if available, else error */
>> + if (!entry) {
>> + if (root->mcfg_addr)
>> + return root->mcfg_addr;
>> + pr_err("%04x:%pR MCFG lookup failed\n", root->segment, bus_res);
>> + return -ENOENT;
>> + } else if (root->mcfg_addr && entry->address != root->mcfg_addr) {
>> + pr_warn("%04x:%pR CBA %pa != MCFG %lx, using CBA\n",
>> + root->segment, bus_res, &root->mcfg_addr,
>> + (unsigned long)entry->address);
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>
> I keep looking at this code, trying to find where we "use _CBA", but I
> can't find it. Oh, I see, acpi_pci_root_add() calls
> acpi_pci_root_get_mcfg_addr() (which evaluates _CBA), and sets
> root->mcfg_addr to the result.
>
> "root->mcfg_addr" is sort of an unfortunate name because "MCFG" is the
> ACPI table name, we've used "ECAM" for the memory-mapped config space,
> and this address can come from either the MCFG table or the _CBA
> method.
>
> In the case where we have both _CBA and an MCFG entry, I think we
> should prefer _CBA, and I'm not sure it's even worth warning about it.
> So I think you could simplify this function if you made
> pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping() look like this:
>
> ... pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping(...)
> {
> ...
> if (!root->mcfg_addr)
> root->mcfg_addr = pci_mcfg_lookup(root);
>
> if (!root->mcfg_addr) {
> dev_err(..., "no ECAM region found\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> }

OK

>
>> +
>> + /* found matching entry, bus range check */
>> + if (entry->end_bus_number != bus_res->end) {
>> + resource_size_t bus_end = min_t(resource_size_t,
>> + entry->end_bus_number, bus_res->end);
>> + pr_warn("%04x:%pR bus end mismatch, using %02lx\n",
>> + root->segment, bus_res, (unsigned long)bus_end);
>> + bus_res->end = bus_end;
>> + }

What about bus end mismatch case? Should we trim the host bridge bus
range or expect MCFG entry covers that range? Sometimes we get _BBN-0xFF
bus range, not from _CRS.

>> +
>> + if (!root->mcfg_addr)
>> + root->mcfg_addr = entry->address;
>
> Please move the assignment to the caller (I think Lorenzo pointed this
> out already).
>
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static __init int pci_mcfg_parse(struct acpi_table_header *header)
>> +{
>> + if (header->length < sizeof(struct acpi_table_mcfg))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + mcfg_entries = (header->length - sizeof(struct acpi_table_mcfg)) /
>> + sizeof(struct acpi_mcfg_allocation);
>> + if (mcfg_entries == 0) {
>> + pr_err("MCFG has no entries\n");
>
> Include an address here? I'm not really sure either of the messages
> here is necessary. Users (callers of pci_mcfg_lookup()) will notice
> if we can't find any ECAM space and will probably complain there,
> where the message can include more information, e.g., the affected
> device.

I would keep message about how many entries we found here. It would be
valuable information IMO.

>
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + mcfg_table = (struct acpi_table_mcfg *)header;
>> + pr_info("MCFG table detected, %d entries\n", mcfg_entries);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* Interface called by ACPI - parse and save MCFG table */
>
> I think we save a *pointer* to the MCFG table, not the table itself.

Right, the comment is broken.

>
> And acpi_table_parse() calls early_acpi_os_unmap_memory() immediately
> after it calls pci_mcfg_parse(), so I'm doubtful that the pointer
> remains valid.

At this stage early_acpi_os_unmap_memory() is doing nothing since
acpi_early_init() set acpi_gbl_permanent_mmap to 1 way before. The
pointer is fine then.

Thanks,
Tomasz