> -----Original Message-----
> From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2022 12:51 PM
> To: Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx; Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx>;
> bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; festevam@xxxxxxxxx;
> imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jdmason@xxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; kw@xxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; lznuaa@xxxxxxxxx; maz@xxxxxxxxxx;
> ntb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> kishon@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v13 1/2] PCI: endpoint: pci-epf-vntb: change
> doorbell register offset calc mathod
>
> Caution: EXT Email
>
> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 05:49:32PM +0000, Frank Li wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2022 3:19 AM
> > > To: Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx; Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@xxxxxxx>;
> > > bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> festevam@xxxxxxxxx;
> > > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; jdmason@xxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > kishon@xxxxxx; krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; kw@xxxxxxxxx; linux-
> > > arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>;
> linux-
> > > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; lznuaa@xxxxxxxxx; maz@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > ntb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>; robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v13 1/2] PCI: endpoint: pci-epf-vntb: change
> > > doorbell register offset calc mathod
> > >
> > > Caution: EXT Email
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 12:50:35AM -0500, Frank Li wrote:
> > > > In drivers/ntb/hw/epf/ntb_hw_epf.c
> > > > ntb_epf_peer_db_set()
> > > > {
> > > > ...
> > > > db_offset = readl(ndev->ctrl_reg +
> NTB_EPF_DB_OFFSET(interrupt_num));
> > > > writel(db_data, ndev->db_reg + (db_entry_size * interrupt_num) +
> > > > db_offset);
> > > > ...
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > The door register offset's formular is
> > > > offset = db_entry_size * interrupt_num +
> db_offset[interrupt_number]
> > >
> > > You did not mention the DB BAR here. Without that, this calculation
> doesn't
> > > make sense.
> >
> > Doorbell register offset should means Base on DB BAR.
> > How about "The formula of door register offset refer to DB BAR"?
>
> "Doobell register offset in DB BAR is calculated using:"
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Previous db_entry_size is 4, all db_offset is 0.
> > >
> > > s/Previous/Previously
> > >
> > > > irq | offset
> > > > --------------
> > > > 0 0
> > > > 1 4
> > > > 2 8
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > Change to db_entry_size is 0 and db_offset is 0, 4, 8, ...
> > > > So we can get the same map value between irq and offset. This will be
> > > > convenience for hardware doorbell register memory map.
> > > >
> > >
> > > In your irq-imx-mu-msi.c driver, the msi_address is calculated as:
> > >
> > > ```
> > > u64 addr = msi_data->msiir_addr + 4 * data->hwirq;
> > > ```
> > >
> > > So the MSI addresses itself are of 4 bytes width. So the offsets will be
> > > separated by 8 bytes like, 0, 8, 16,... and this won't match the MSI
> addresses
> > > as they are 4 bytes apart.
> >
> > Addr is absolute physical IO address, which increased by 4. But it doesn't
> matter.
> > It should be okay if range is between 2^32.
> >
> > >
> > > So you want to change the offset to 0, 4, 8,... by zeroing db_entry_size,
> > > right?
> >
> > I want to directly using db_offset[irq] value as offset. It will be simple.
> >
> > I am not sure why ntb_hw_epf.c use below formular.
> > "Db_offset[irq] + irq * db_entry_size"
> >
> > Db_entry_size = 0 will be simple, all offset will be controlled by db_offset[]
> >
> > You can save db_offset[] as 0, 4, 8... or 0, 8, 16 as needs.
> >
> > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@xxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c | 4 ++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c
> > > b/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c
> > > > index 04698e7995a5..0d744975f815 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-vntb.c
> > > > @@ -461,11 +461,11 @@ static int
> epf_ntb_config_spad_bar_alloc(struct
> > > epf_ntb *ntb)
> > > > ctrl->num_mws = ntb->num_mws;
> > > > ntb->spad_size = spad_size;
> > > >
> > > > - ctrl->db_entry_size = sizeof(u32);
> > > > + ctrl->db_entry_size = 0;
> > > >
> > > > for (i = 0; i < ntb->db_count; i++) {
> > > > ntb->reg->db_data[i] = 1 + i;
> > > > - ntb->reg->db_offset[i] = 0;
> > > > + ntb->reg->db_offset[i] = sizeof(u32) * i;
> > >
> > > If my above understanding is correct, then you could just reassign
> > > "db_entry_size" in epf_ntb_epc_msi_init().
> >
> > Yes, that's one method.
> > I want to use one method to calc db offset for both software polling
> > and MSI. So overall logic should be simple.
> >
>
> I think it is better to leave db_entry_size for polling as it is and modify it
> for MSI alone.
Okay, that means needn't this patch at all.
>
> Thanks,
> Mani
>
> > Frank Li
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mani
> > >
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > return 0;
> > > > --
> > > > 2.34.1
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
>
> --
> மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
