From: Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>
To: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>, Duc Dang <dhdang@apm.com>
Cc: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>,
Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@huawei.com>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
Jeff Hugo <jhugo@codeaurora.org>,
Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>,
Jon Masters <jcm@redhat.com>, Mark Salter <msalter@redhat.com>,
Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>,
Jayachandran C <jchandra@broadcom.com>,
David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Ganapatrao Kulkarni <gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] ARM64/PCI: Start using quirks handling for ACPI based PCI host controller
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 13:17:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5768252D.7090206@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160620094227.GA27594@red-moon>
Hi Duc,
On 06/20/2016 05:42 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 02:37:02PM -0700, Duc Dang wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
>> <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 11:34:11AM -0400, Christopher Covington wrote:
>>>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
>>>>
>>>> pci_generic_ecam_ops is used by default. Since there are platforms
>>>> which have non-compliant ECAM space we need to overwrite these
>>>> accessors prior to PCI buses enumeration. In order to do that
>>>> we call pci_mcfg_get_ops to retrieve pci_ecam_ops structure so that
>>>> we can use proper PCI config space accessors and bus_shift.
>>>>
>>>> pci_generic_ecam_ops is still used for platforms free from quirks.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c | 7 ++++---
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>>> index 94cd43c..a891bda 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
>>>> @@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>> struct pci_config_window *cfg;
>>>> struct resource cfgres;
>>>> unsigned int bsz;
>>>> + struct pci_ecam_ops *ops;
>>>>
>>>> /* Use address from _CBA if present, otherwise lookup MCFG */
>>>> if (!root->mcfg_addr)
>>>> @@ -150,12 +151,12 @@ pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>>>> return NULL;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> - bsz = 1 << pci_generic_ecam_ops.bus_shift;
>>>> + ops = pci_mcfg_get_ops(root);
>>>> + bsz = 1 << ops->bus_shift;
>>>> cfgres.start = root->mcfg_addr + bus_res->start * bsz;
>>>> cfgres.end = cfgres.start + resource_size(bus_res) * bsz - 1;
>>>> cfgres.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM;
>>>> - cfg = pci_ecam_create(&root->device->dev, &cfgres, bus_res,
>>>> - &pci_generic_ecam_ops);
>>>> + cfg = pci_ecam_create(&root->device->dev, &cfgres, bus_res, ops);
>>>
>>> Arnd pointed this out already, I think that's the only pending question
>>> here.
>>>
>>> pci_ecam_create() maps ECAM space for config regions retrieved from
>>> the MCFG, which are *supposed* to be ECAM compliant.
>>>
>>> Do we think that's *always* correct/safe regardless of the kind
>>> of quirk we are currently fixing up ?
>>>
>>> Or we do think that configuration space regions should come from
>>> a different resource declared in the ACPI namespace if the regions
>>> are not MCFG/ECAM compliant (ie config space is not defined through
>>> MCFG at all - possibly through a _CRS method for a vendor specific
>>> _HID under the PNP0A03 node ?)
>>
>> Hi Lorenzo,
>>
>> For X-Gene: the ECAM space is used to access the configuration space
>> of PCIe devices, with additional help from controller register to
>> specify the bus, device and function number. Below is the RFC patch
>> that implements ECAM fixup for X-Gene PCIe controller on top of this
>> RFC ECAM quirk v3 for your and others reference.
>
> Yes, you have an additional resource in the PNP0A03 _CRS to describe
> your register that is a deliberate abuse of the ACPI standard in
> that the _CRS is meant to describe resources that are passed on
> to secondary buses
A potential alternative came up in an off-list discussion: Would it be
better to hard code the information in the quirk workaround than look it
up from a repurposed ACPI resource?
Supporting quirk workarounds for early, non-compliant hardware is
helpful and perhaps necessary for bootstrapping the ecosystem in a
timely manner. But we don't really want to provide an expandable or
reusable interface that would make it easy for new hardware to remain
non-compliant.
Regards,
Cov
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-20 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-17 21:37 [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] ARM64/PCI: Start using quirks handling for ACPI based PCI host controller Duc Dang
2016-06-20 9:42 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-20 17:17 ` Christopher Covington [this message]
2016-06-20 19:12 ` Duc Dang
2016-06-21 8:42 ` Duc Dang
2016-06-21 9:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-21 9:29 ` Duc Dang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-06-15 15:34 [RFC PATCH v3 1/2] ACPI/PCI: Check platform specific ECAM quirks Christopher Covington
2016-06-15 15:34 ` [RFC PATCH v3 2/2] ARM64/PCI: Start using quirks handling for ACPI based PCI host controller Christopher Covington
2016-06-16 17:48 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-17 8:01 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-06-17 14:13 ` Christopher Covington
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=5768252D.7090206@codeaurora.org \
--to=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=dhdang@apm.com \
--cc=gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com \
--cc=gkulkarni@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=jchandra@broadcom.com \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=jhugo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liudongdong3@huawei.com \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=msalter@redhat.com \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=tn@semihalf.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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).