From: "Christian König" <christian.koenig@amd.com>
To: Vivian Wang <wangruikang@iscas.ac.cn>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
"Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Simona Vetter <simona@ffwll.ch>,
Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@amd.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.com>
Cc: Han Gao <gaohan@iscas.ac.cn>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sound@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] PCI/MSI: Generalize no_64bit_msi into msi_addr_mask
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2026 16:15:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0d76a0dc-aebd-452d-bbe3-940775a23761@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251224-pci-msi-addr-mask-v1-0-05a6fcb4b4c0@iscas.ac.cn>
On 12/24/25 04:10, Vivian Wang wrote:
> The Sophgo SG2042 is a cursed machine in more ways than one.
>
> The one way relevant to this patch series is that its PCIe controller
> has neither INTx nor a low-address MSI doorbell wired up. Instead, the
> only usable MSI doorbell is a SoC one at 0x7030010300, which is above
> 32-bit space.
Oh! That sounds like a really big show stopper for a lot of PCIe devices.
Pretty much all 32bit devices are impossible to work with that.
If I'm not completely mistaken that even makes the platform non-PCIe spec complaint.
> Currently, the no_64bit_msi flag on a PCI device declares that a device
> needs a 32-bit MSI address. Since no more precise indication is
> possible, devices supporting less than 64 bits of MSI addresses are all
> lumped into one "need 32-bit MSI address" bucket. This of course
> prevents these devices from working with MSI enabled on SG2042 because a
> 32-bit MSI doorbell address is not possible. Combined with a lack of
> INTx, some of them have trouble working on SG2042 at all.
>
> There were previous dirtier attempts to allow overriding no_64bit_msi
> for radeon [1] and hda/intel [2].
>
> To fix this, generalize the single bit no_64bit_msi into a full address
> mask msi_addr_mask to more precisely describe the restriction. The
> existing DMA masks seems insufficient, as for e.g. radeon the
> msi_addr_mask and coherent_dma_mask seems to be different on more recent
> devices.
>
> The patches are structured as follows:
>
> - Patch 1 conservatively introduces msi_addr_mask, without introducing
> any functional changes (hopefully, if I've done everything right), by
> only using DMA_BIT_MASK(32) and DMA_BIT_MASK(64).
> - The rest of the series actually make use of intermediate values of
> msi_addr_mask, and should be independently appliable. Patch 2 relaxes
> msi_verify_entries() to allow intermediate values of msi_addr_mask.
> Patch 3 onwards raises msi_addr_mask in individual device drivers.
>
> Tested on SG2042 with a Radeon R5 220 which makes use of radeon and
> hda/intel. PPC changes and pensanto/ionic changes are compile-tested
> only, since I do not have the hardware.
>
> I would appreciate if driver maintainers can take a look and see whether
> the masks I've set makes sense, although I believe they shouldn't cause
> problems on existing platforms. I'm also not familiar with PPC enough to
> touch the arch/powerpc firmware calls further - help would be
> appreciated.
Over all the approach looks sane to me, but the radeon patch needs some changes.
Going to comment on the patch itself.
Regards,
Christian.
>
> My intention is that the first two patches are taken up by PCI
> maintainers, and the rest go through the maintainers of individual
> drivers since they could use more device-specific testing and review. If
> this is not convenient I'll be happy to split it up or something.
>
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251220163338.3852399-1-gaohan@iscas.ac.cn/
> [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251220170501.3972438-1-gaohan@iscas.ac.cn/
>
> ---
> Vivian Wang (5):
> PCI/MSI: Conservatively generalize no_64bit_msi into msi_addr_mask
> PCI/MSI: Check msi_addr_mask in msi_verify_entries()
> drm/radeon: Raise msi_addr_mask to 40 bits for pre-Bonaire
> ALSA: hda/intel: Raise msi_addr_mask to dma_bits
> [RFC net-next] net: ionic: Set msi_addr_mask to IONIC_ADDR_LEN-bit everywhere
>
> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c | 2 +-
> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/msi.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_irq_kms.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/net/ethernet/pensando/ionic/ionic_bus_pci.c | 4 +---
> drivers/pci/msi/msi.c | 11 +++++++----
> drivers/pci/msi/pcidev_msi.c | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/probe.c | 7 +++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 8 +++++++-
> sound/hda/controllers/intel.c | 10 +++++-----
> 9 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 8f0b4cce4481fb22653697cced8d0d04027cb1e8
> change-id: 20251223-pci-msi-addr-mask-2d765a7eb390
>
> Best regards,
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-07 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-24 3:10 [PATCH 0/5] PCI/MSI: Generalize no_64bit_msi into msi_addr_mask Vivian Wang
2025-12-24 3:10 ` [PATCH 1/5] PCI/MSI: Conservatively generalize " Vivian Wang
2026-01-05 18:05 ` Creeley, Brett
2026-01-06 7:41 ` Vivian Wang
2025-12-24 3:10 ` [PATCH 2/5] PCI/MSI: Check msi_addr_mask in msi_verify_entries() Vivian Wang
2025-12-24 3:10 ` [PATCH 3/5] drm/radeon: Raise msi_addr_mask to 40 bits for pre-Bonaire Vivian Wang
2026-01-07 15:20 ` Christian König
2026-01-08 6:41 ` Vivian Wang
2025-12-24 3:10 ` [PATCH 4/5] ALSA: hda/intel: Raise msi_addr_mask to dma_bits Vivian Wang
2025-12-24 3:10 ` [PATCH RFC net-next 5/5] net: ionic: Set msi_addr_mask to IONIC_ADDR_LEN-bit everywhere Vivian Wang
2026-01-06 18:37 ` Creeley, Brett
2025-12-24 4:51 ` [PATCH 0/5] PCI/MSI: Generalize no_64bit_msi into msi_addr_mask Vivian Wang
2026-01-07 15:15 ` Christian König [this message]
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=0d76a0dc-aebd-452d-bbe3-940775a23761@amd.com \
--to=christian.koenig@amd.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=brett.creeley@amd.com \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gaohan@iscas.ac.cn \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sound@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=perex@perex.cz \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tiwai@suse.com \
--cc=wangruikang@iscas.ac.cn \
/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