On 14/11/2024 10:03:13+0530, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
>
>
> On 11/13/2024 19:51, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 01:03:20PM +0530, Shyam Sundar S K wrote:
> >> As of now, the I3C subsystem only has ARM-specific initialization, and
> >> there is no corresponding ACPI plumbing present. To address this, ACPI
> >> support needs to be added to both the I3C core and DW driver.
> >>
> >> Add support to get the ACPI handle from the _HID probed and parse the apci
> >> object to retrieve the slave information from BIOS.
> >>
> >> Based on the acpi object information propogated via BIOS, build the i3c
> >> board information so that the same information can be used across the
> >> driver to handle the slave requests.
> >>
> >> Co-developed-by: Sanket Goswami <Sanket.Goswami@xxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <Sanket.Goswami@xxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@xxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> Cc: linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >> drivers/i3c/internals.h | 3 ++
> >> drivers/i3c/master.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> drivers/i3c/master/dw-i3c-master.c | 7 +++
> >> include/linux/i3c/master.h | 1 +
> >> 4 files changed, 95 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/i3c/internals.h b/drivers/i3c/internals.h
> >> index 433f6088b7ce..178bc0ebe6b6 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/i3c/internals.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/i3c/internals.h
> >> @@ -10,6 +10,9 @@
> >>
> >> #include <linux/i3c/master.h>
> >>
> >> +#define I3C_GET_PID 0x08
> >> +#define I3C_GET_ADDR 0x7F
> >> +
> >> void i3c_bus_normaluse_lock(struct i3c_bus *bus);
> >> void i3c_bus_normaluse_unlock(struct i3c_bus *bus);
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/i3c/master.c b/drivers/i3c/master.c
> >> index 6f3eb710a75d..0ceef2aa9161 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/i3c/master.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/i3c/master.c
> >> @@ -2251,6 +2251,84 @@ static int of_i3c_master_add_dev(struct i3c_master_controller *master,
> >> return ret;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ACPI)
> >> +static int i3c_acpi_configure_master(struct i3c_master_controller *master)
> >> +{
> >> + struct acpi_buffer buf = {ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL};
> >> + enum i3c_addr_slot_status addrstatus;
> >> + struct i3c_dev_boardinfo *boardinfo;
> >> + struct device *dev = &master->dev;
> >> + struct fwnode_handle *fwnode;
> >> + struct acpi_device *adev;
> >> + u32 slv_addr, num_dev;
> >> + acpi_status status;
> >> + u64 val;
> >> +
> >> + status = acpi_evaluate_object_typed(master->ahandle, "_DSD", NULL, &buf, ACPI_TYPE_PACKAGE);
> >> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> >> + dev_err(&master->dev, "Error reading _DSD:%s\n", acpi_format_exception(status));
> >> + return -ENODEV;
> >> + }
> >
> > Why do you need to do that?
> >
> >> + num_dev = device_get_child_node_count(dev);
> >> + if (!num_dev) {
> >> + dev_err(&master->dev, "Error: no child node present\n");
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >
> > I think Jarkko already pointed out the problem with that. The whole
> > check should be dropped.
> >
> >> + device_for_each_child_node(dev, fwnode) {
> >> + adev = to_acpi_device_node(fwnode);
> >> + if (!adev)
> >> + return -ENODEV;
> >> +
> >> + status = acpi_evaluate_integer(adev->handle, "_ADR", NULL, &val);
> >> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> >> + dev_err(&master->dev, "Error: eval _ADR failed\n");
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >
> > val = acpi_device_adr(adev);
> >
> >> + slv_addr = val & I3C_GET_ADDR;
> >> +
> >> + boardinfo = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*boardinfo), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + if (!boardinfo)
> >> + return -ENOMEM;
> >> +
> >> + if (slv_addr) {
> >> + if (slv_addr > I3C_MAX_ADDR)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> + addrstatus = i3c_bus_get_addr_slot_status(&master->bus, slv_addr);
> >> + if (addrstatus != I3C_ADDR_SLOT_FREE)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + boardinfo->static_addr = slv_addr;
> >> + if (boardinfo->static_addr > I3C_MAX_ADDR)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> + addrstatus = i3c_bus_get_addr_slot_status(&master->bus, boardinfo->static_addr);
> >> + if (addrstatus != I3C_ADDR_SLOT_FREE)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> + boardinfo->pid = val >> I3C_GET_PID;
> >> + if ((boardinfo->pid & GENMASK_ULL(63, 48)) ||
> >> + I3C_PID_RND_LOWER_32BITS(boardinfo->pid))
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> + /*
> >> + * According to the specification, SETDASA is not supported for DIMM slaves
> >> + * during device discovery. Therefore, BIOS will populate same initial
> >> + * dynamic address as the static address.
> >> + */
> >> + boardinfo->init_dyn_addr = boardinfo->static_addr;
> >> + list_add_tail(&boardinfo->node, &master->boardinfo.i3c);
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +#else
> >> +static int i3c_acpi_configure_master(struct i3c_master_controller *master) { return 0; }
> >> +#endif
> >
> > I think this code should be placed into a separate file.
> >
> > If the goal is to add ACPI support for code that is written for DT
> > only, then I think the first thing to do before that really should be
> > to convert the existing code to use the unified device property
> > interface, and move all the DT-only parts to a separate file(s).
> >
>
> Thank you Jarkko and Heikki. Let me work and these remarks and come
> back with a new version.
>
> Jarkko, will you be able to pick 1/5 and 5/5 without a separate series
> or do you want me to send one?
Please send a new series.
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
