On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 06:53:53PM -0500, Jim Quinlan wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 05:12:07PM -0500, Jim Quinlan wrote: >> >> This commit adds the basic Broadcom STB PCIe controller. Missing is >> >> the ability to process MSI and also handle dma-ranges for inbound >> >> memory accesses. These two functionalities are added in subsequent >> >> commits. >> >> >> >> The PCIe block contains an MDIO interface. This is a local interface >> >> only accessible by the PCIe controller. It cannot be used or shared >> >> by any other HW. As such, the small amount of code for this >> >> controller is included in this driver as there is little upside to put >> >> it elsewhere. >> ... > >> >> +static bool brcm_pcie_valid_device(struct brcm_pcie *pcie, struct pci_bus *bus, >> >> + int dev) >> >> +{ >> >> + if (pci_is_root_bus(bus)) { >> >> + if (dev > 0) >> >> + return false; >> >> + } else { >> >> + /* If there is no link, then there is no device */ >> >> + if (!brcm_pcie_link_up(pcie)) >> >> + return false; >> > >> > This is racy, since the link can go down after you check but before >> > you do the config access. I assume your hardware can deal with a >> > config access that targets a link that is down? >> >> Yes, that can happen but there is really nothing that can be done if >> the link goes down in that vulnerability window. What do you suggest >> doing? > > Most hardware drops writes and returns ~0 on reads if the link is > down. I assume your hardware does something similar, and that should > be enough. You shouldn't have to check whether the link is up. Unfortunately our HW is quite unforgiving and effects a synchronous or asynchronous abort when doing a config access when the link or power has gone down on the EP. I will open a discussion with the PCIe HW folks regarding why our controller does not behave like "most hardware". Thanks, Jim > > The hardware might report errors, e.g., via AER, if the link is down. > And we might not not handle those nicely. If we have issues there, we > should find out and fix them. > > I see that dwc, altera, rockchip, and xilinx all do check for link up > there, too. I can't remember if they had a legitimate reason, or if I > just missed it. > >> >> +static void brcm_pcie_remove_controller(struct brcm_pcie *pcie) >> >> +{ >> >> + struct list_head *pos, *q; >> >> + struct brcm_pcie *tmp; >> >> + >> >> + mutex_lock(&brcm_pcie_lock); >> >> + list_for_each_safe(pos, q, &brcm_pcie) { >> >> + tmp = list_entry(pos, struct brcm_pcie, list); >> >> + if (tmp == pcie) { >> >> + list_del(pos); >> >> + if (list_empty(&brcm_pcie)) >> >> + num_memc = 0; >> >> + break; >> >> + } >> >> + } >> >> + mutex_unlock(&brcm_pcie_lock); >> > >> > I'm missing something. I don't see that num_memc is ever set to >> > anything *other* than zero. >> The num_memc is set and used in the dma commit. I will remove its >> declaration from this commit. > > Thanks, that will make the patches much easier to read. > >> >> + pcie->id = of_get_pci_domain_nr(dn); >> > >> > Why do you call of_get_pci_domain_nr() directly? No other driver >> > does. >> >> We use the domain as the controller number (id). We use the id to >> identify and fix a HW bug that only affects the 2nd controller; see >> the clause >> " } else if (of_machine_is_compatible("brcm,bcm7278a0")) {". > > pci_register_host_bridge() already sets bus->domain_nr for every host > bridge. That path calls of_get_pci_domain_nr() eventually. But I > guess that's too late for your use case, because you have this: > > brcm_pcie_probe > brcm_pcie_setup > brcm_pcie_bridge_sw_init_set > if (of_machine_is_compatible("brcm,bcm7278a0")) { > offset = pcie->id ? ... <--- use > pci_scan_root_bus_bridge > pci_register_host_bridge > bus->domain_nr = pci_bus_find_domain_nr <--- available > > I guess you haven't added a binding for brcm,bcm7278a0 yet? > > I'm not really sure that using the linux,pci-domain DT property is the > best way to distinguish the two controllers. Maybe Rob has an > opinion? > >> >> + if (pcie->id < 0) >> >> + return pcie->id; > > Bjorn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html