[+cc Logan]
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 06:27:20PM +0800, Dongdong Liu wrote:
> 10-Bit Tag capability, introduced in PCIe-4.0 increases the total Tag
> field size from 8 bits to 10 bits.
>
> For platforms where the RC supports 10-Bit Tag Completer capability,
> it is highly recommended for platform firmware or operating software
Recommended by whom? If the spec recommends it, we should provide the
citation.
> that configures PCIe hierarchies to Set the 10-Bit Tag Requester Enable
> bit automatically in Endpoints with 10-Bit Tag Requester capability. This
> enables the important class of 10-Bit Tag capable adapters that send
> Memory Read Requests only to host memory.
What is the implication for P2PDMA? What happens if we enable 10-bit
tags for device A, and A generates Mem Read Requests to device B,
which does not support 10-bit tags?
> Signed-off-by: Dongdong Liu <liudongdong3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pci/probe.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> index 0208865..33241fb 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
> @@ -2048,6 +2048,38 @@ int pci_configure_extended_tags(struct pci_dev *dev, void *ign)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void pci_configure_10bit_tags(struct pci_dev *dev)
> +{
> + struct pci_dev *bridge;
> +
> + if (!(dev->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_COMP))
> + return;
> +
> + if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_PORT) {
> + dev->ext_10bit_tag = 1;
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
> + if (bridge && bridge->ext_10bit_tag)
> + dev->ext_10bit_tag = 1;
> +
> + /*
> + * 10-Bit Tag Requester Enable in Device Control 2 Register is RsvdP
> + * for VF.
> + */
> + if (dev->is_virtfn)
> + return;
> +
> + if (pci_pcie_type(dev) == PCI_EXP_TYPE_ENDPOINT &&
> + dev->ext_10bit_tag == 1 &&
> + (dev->pcie_devcap2 & PCI_EXP_DEVCAP2_10BIT_TAG_REQ)) {
> + pci_dbg(dev, "enabling 10-Bit Tag Requester\n");
> + pcie_capability_set_word(dev, PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2,
> + PCI_EXP_DEVCTL2_10BIT_TAG_REQ_EN);
> + }
> +}
> +
> /**
> * pcie_relaxed_ordering_enabled - Probe for PCIe relaxed ordering enable
> * @dev: PCI device to query
> @@ -2184,6 +2216,7 @@ static void pci_configure_device(struct pci_dev *dev)
> {
> pci_configure_mps(dev);
> pci_configure_extended_tags(dev, NULL);
> + pci_configure_10bit_tags(dev);
I think 10-bit tag support should be integrated with extended (8-bit)
tag support instead of having two separate functions.
If we have "no_ext_tags" set because some device doesn't support 8-bit
tags correctly, we probably shouldn't try to enable 10-bit tags
either.
> pci_configure_relaxed_ordering(dev);
> pci_configure_ltr(dev);
> pci_configure_eetlp_prefix(dev);
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index de1fc24..445d102 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -393,6 +393,8 @@ struct pci_dev {
> #endif
> unsigned int eetlp_prefix_path:1; /* End-to-End TLP Prefix */
>
> + unsigned int ext_10bit_tag:1; /* 10-Bit Tag Completer Supported
> + from root to here */
> pci_channel_state_t error_state; /* Current connectivity state */
> struct device dev; /* Generic device interface */
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
