On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 03:00:00AM +0000, Xiaowei Bao wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Murray <andrew.murray@xxxxxxx>
> > Sent: 2019年8月15日 20:51
> > To: Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx; gustavo.pimentel@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx;
> > shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; Leo Li <leoyang.li@xxxxxxx>; kishon@xxxxxx;
> > lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > M.h. Lian <minghuan.lian@xxxxxxx>; Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@xxxxxxx>;
> > Roy Zang <roy.zang@xxxxxxx>; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] PCI: layerscape: Modify the way of getting
> > capability with different PEX
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:37:11PM +0800, Xiaowei Bao wrote:
> > > The different PCIe controller in one board may be have different
> > > capability of MSI or MSIX, so change the way of getting the MSI
> > > capability, make it more flexible.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c | 28
> > > +++++++++++++++++++-------
> > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> > > b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> > > index be61d96..9404ca0 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> > > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> > >
> > > struct ls_pcie_ep {
> > > struct dw_pcie *pci;
> > > + struct pci_epc_features *ls_epc;
> > > };
> > >
> > > #define to_ls_pcie_ep(x) dev_get_drvdata((x)->dev)
> > > @@ -40,25 +41,26 @@ static const struct of_device_id
> > ls_pcie_ep_of_match[] = {
> > > { },
> > > };
> > >
> > > -static const struct pci_epc_features ls_pcie_epc_features = {
> > > - .linkup_notifier = false,
> > > - .msi_capable = true,
> > > - .msix_capable = false,
> > > -};
> > > -
> > > static const struct pci_epc_features* ls_pcie_ep_get_features(struct
> > > dw_pcie_ep *ep) {
> > > - return &ls_pcie_epc_features;
> > > + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep);
> > > + struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci);
> > > +
> > > + return pcie->ls_epc;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static void ls_pcie_ep_init(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep) {
> > > struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep);
> > > + struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci);
> > > enum pci_barno bar;
> > >
> > > for (bar = BAR_0; bar <= BAR_5; bar++)
> > > dw_pcie_ep_reset_bar(pci, bar);
> > > +
> > > + pcie->ls_epc->msi_capable = ep->msi_cap ? true : false;
> > > + pcie->ls_epc->msix_capable = ep->msix_cap ? true : false;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static int ls_pcie_ep_raise_irq(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep, u8 func_no, @@
> > > -118,6 +120,7 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev)
> > > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > > struct dw_pcie *pci;
> > > struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie;
> > > + struct pci_epc_features *ls_epc;
> > > struct resource *dbi_base;
> > > int ret;
> > >
> > > @@ -129,6 +132,10 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > > if (!pci)
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > >
> > > + ls_epc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ls_epc), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!ls_epc)
> > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > +
> > > dbi_base = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > "regs");
> > > pci->dbi_base = devm_pci_remap_cfg_resource(dev, dbi_base);
> > > if (IS_ERR(pci->dbi_base))
> > > @@ -139,6 +146,13 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> > > pci->ops = &ls_pcie_ep_ops;
> > > pcie->pci = pci;
> > >
> > > + ls_epc->linkup_notifier = false,
> > > + ls_epc->msi_capable = true,
> > > + ls_epc->msix_capable = true,
> >
> > As [msi,msix]_capable is shortly set from ls_pcie_ep_init - is there any reason
> > to set them here (to potentially incorrect values)?
> This is a INIT value, maybe false is better for msi_capable and msix_capable,
> of course, we don't need to set it.
ls_epc is kzalloc'd and so all zeros, so you get false for free. I think you
can remove these two lines (or all three if you don't care that linkup_notifier
isn't explicitly set).
Thanks,
Andrew Murray
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Andrew Murray
> >
> > > + ls_epc->bar_fixed_64bit = (1 << BAR_2) | (1 << BAR_4),
> > > +
> > > + pcie->ls_epc = ls_epc;
> > > +
> > > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcie);
> > >
> > > ret = ls_add_pcie_ep(pcie, pdev);
> > > --
> > > 2.9.5
> > >
