On 01-11-19, 10:41, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> Split patch for review containing: channel rsource allocation and free
s/rsource/resource
> +static int udma_tisci_tx_channel_config(struct udma_chan *uc)
> +{
> + struct udma_dev *ud = uc->ud;
> + struct udma_tisci_rm *tisci_rm = &ud->tisci_rm;
> + const struct ti_sci_rm_udmap_ops *tisci_ops = tisci_rm->tisci_udmap_ops;
> + struct udma_tchan *tchan = uc->tchan;
> + int tc_ring = k3_ringacc_get_ring_id(tchan->tc_ring);
> + struct ti_sci_msg_rm_udmap_tx_ch_cfg req_tx = { 0 };
> + u32 mode, fetch_size;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (uc->pkt_mode) {
> + mode = TI_SCI_RM_UDMAP_CHAN_TYPE_PKT_PBRR;
> + fetch_size = cppi5_hdesc_calc_size(uc->needs_epib, uc->psd_size,
> + 0);
> + } else {
> + mode = TI_SCI_RM_UDMAP_CHAN_TYPE_3RDP_PBRR;
> + fetch_size = sizeof(struct cppi5_desc_hdr_t);
> + }
> +
> + req_tx.valid_params =
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_PAUSE_ON_ERR_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_TX_FILT_EINFO_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_TX_FILT_PSWORDS_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_CHAN_TYPE_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_TX_SUPR_TDPKT_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_FETCH_SIZE_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_CQ_QNUM_VALID;
bunch of these are repeat, you can define a COMMON_VALID_PARAMS and use
that + specific ones..
> +
> + req_tx.nav_id = tisci_rm->tisci_dev_id;
> + req_tx.index = tchan->id;
> + req_tx.tx_pause_on_err = 0;
> + req_tx.tx_filt_einfo = 0;
> + req_tx.tx_filt_pswords = 0;
i think initialization to 0 is superfluous
> + req_tx.tx_chan_type = mode;
> + req_tx.tx_supr_tdpkt = uc->notdpkt;
> + req_tx.tx_fetch_size = fetch_size >> 2;
> + req_tx.txcq_qnum = tc_ring;
> + if (uc->ep_type == PSIL_EP_PDMA_XY) {
> + /* wait for peer to complete the teardown for PDMAs */
> + req_tx.valid_params |=
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_TX_TDTYPE_VALID;
> + req_tx.tx_tdtype = 1;
> + }
> +
> + ret = tisci_ops->tx_ch_cfg(tisci_rm->tisci, &req_tx);
> + if (ret)
> + dev_err(ud->dev, "tchan%d cfg failed %d\n", tchan->id, ret);
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int udma_tisci_rx_channel_config(struct udma_chan *uc)
> +{
> + struct udma_dev *ud = uc->ud;
> + struct udma_tisci_rm *tisci_rm = &ud->tisci_rm;
> + const struct ti_sci_rm_udmap_ops *tisci_ops = tisci_rm->tisci_udmap_ops;
> + struct udma_rchan *rchan = uc->rchan;
> + int fd_ring = k3_ringacc_get_ring_id(rchan->fd_ring);
> + int rx_ring = k3_ringacc_get_ring_id(rchan->r_ring);
> + struct ti_sci_msg_rm_udmap_rx_ch_cfg req_rx = { 0 };
> + struct ti_sci_msg_rm_udmap_flow_cfg flow_req = { 0 };
> + u32 mode, fetch_size;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (uc->pkt_mode) {
> + mode = TI_SCI_RM_UDMAP_CHAN_TYPE_PKT_PBRR;
> + fetch_size = cppi5_hdesc_calc_size(uc->needs_epib,
> + uc->psd_size, 0);
> + } else {
> + mode = TI_SCI_RM_UDMAP_CHAN_TYPE_3RDP_PBRR;
> + fetch_size = sizeof(struct cppi5_desc_hdr_t);
> + }
> +
> + req_rx.valid_params =
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_PAUSE_ON_ERR_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_FETCH_SIZE_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_CQ_QNUM_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_CHAN_TYPE_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_RX_IGNORE_SHORT_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_RX_IGNORE_LONG_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_RX_FLOWID_START_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_CH_RX_FLOWID_CNT_VALID;
> +
> + req_rx.nav_id = tisci_rm->tisci_dev_id;
> + req_rx.index = rchan->id;
> + req_rx.rx_fetch_size = fetch_size >> 2;
> + req_rx.rxcq_qnum = rx_ring;
> + req_rx.rx_pause_on_err = 0;
> + req_rx.rx_chan_type = mode;
> + req_rx.rx_ignore_short = 0;
> + req_rx.rx_ignore_long = 0;
> + req_rx.flowid_start = 0;
> + req_rx.flowid_cnt = 0;
> +
> + ret = tisci_ops->rx_ch_cfg(tisci_rm->tisci, &req_rx);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(ud->dev, "rchan%d cfg failed %d\n", rchan->id, ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + flow_req.valid_params =
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_EINFO_PRESENT_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_PSINFO_PRESENT_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_ERROR_HANDLING_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_DESC_TYPE_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_DEST_QNUM_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_SRC_TAG_HI_SEL_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_SRC_TAG_LO_SEL_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_DEST_TAG_HI_SEL_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_DEST_TAG_LO_SEL_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_FDQ0_SZ0_QNUM_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_FDQ1_QNUM_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_FDQ2_QNUM_VALID |
> + TI_SCI_MSG_VALUE_RM_UDMAP_FLOW_FDQ3_QNUM_VALID;
> +
> + flow_req.nav_id = tisci_rm->tisci_dev_id;
> + flow_req.flow_index = rchan->id;
> +
> + if (uc->needs_epib)
> + flow_req.rx_einfo_present = 1;
> + else
> + flow_req.rx_einfo_present = 0;
> + if (uc->psd_size)
> + flow_req.rx_psinfo_present = 1;
> + else
> + flow_req.rx_psinfo_present = 0;
> + flow_req.rx_error_handling = 1;
> + flow_req.rx_desc_type = 0;
> + flow_req.rx_dest_qnum = rx_ring;
> + flow_req.rx_src_tag_hi_sel = 2;
> + flow_req.rx_src_tag_lo_sel = 4;
> + flow_req.rx_dest_tag_hi_sel = 5;
> + flow_req.rx_dest_tag_lo_sel = 4;
can we get rid of magic numbers here and elsewhere, or at least comment
on what these mean..
> +static int udma_alloc_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *chan)
> +{
> + struct udma_chan *uc = to_udma_chan(chan);
> + struct udma_dev *ud = to_udma_dev(chan->device);
> + const struct udma_match_data *match_data = ud->match_data;
> + struct k3_ring *irq_ring;
> + u32 irq_udma_idx;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (uc->pkt_mode || uc->dir == DMA_MEM_TO_MEM) {
> + uc->use_dma_pool = true;
> + /* in case of MEM_TO_MEM we have maximum of two TRs */
> + if (uc->dir == DMA_MEM_TO_MEM) {
> + uc->hdesc_size = cppi5_trdesc_calc_size(
> + sizeof(struct cppi5_tr_type15_t), 2);
> + uc->pkt_mode = false;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (uc->use_dma_pool) {
> + uc->hdesc_pool = dma_pool_create(uc->name, ud->ddev.dev,
> + uc->hdesc_size, ud->desc_align,
> + 0);
> + if (!uc->hdesc_pool) {
> + dev_err(ud->ddev.dev,
> + "Descriptor pool allocation failed\n");
> + uc->use_dma_pool = false;
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Make sure that the completion is in a known state:
> + * No teardown, the channel is idle
> + */
> + reinit_completion(&uc->teardown_completed);
> + complete_all(&uc->teardown_completed);
should we not complete first and then do reinit to bring a clean state?
> + uc->state = UDMA_CHAN_IS_IDLE;
> +
> + switch (uc->dir) {
> + case DMA_MEM_TO_MEM:
can you explain why a allocation should be channel dependent, shouldn't
these things be done in prep_ calls?
I looked ahead and checked the prep_ calls and we can use any direction
so this somehow doesn't make sense!
--
~Vinod
