On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 04:37:41PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 2:12 PM Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2022/7/16 上午11:23, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:27:00AM +0800, Jianmin Lv wrote: > > >> On 2022/7/16 上午12:37, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > >>> On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 04:05:12PM +0800, Jianmin Lv wrote: > > >>>> On 2022/7/15 上午11:44, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 08:42:16PM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote: > > >>>>>> From: Jianmin Lv <lvjianmin@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> In LS7A, multifunction device use same PCI PIN (because the > > >>>>>> PIN register report the same INTx value to each function) > > >>>>>> but we need different IRQ for different functions, so add a > > >>>>>> quirk to fix it for standard PCI PIN usage. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> This patch only affect ACPI based systems (and only needed > > >>>>>> by ACPI based systems, too). For DT based systems, the irq > > >>>>>> mappings is defined in .dts files and be handled by > > >>>>>> of_irq_parse_pci(). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I'm sorry, I know you've explained this before, but I don't > > >>>>> understand yet, so let's try again. I *think* you're saying > > >>>>> that: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - These devices integrated into LS7A all report 0 in their > > >>>>> Interrupt Pin registers. Per spec, this means they do not > > >>>>> use INTx (PCIe r6.0, sec 7.5.1.1.13). > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - However, these devices actually *do* use INTx. Function > > >>>>> 0 uses INTA, function 1 uses INTB, ..., function 4 uses > > >>>>> INTA, ... > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - The quirk overrides the incorrect values read from the > > >>>>> Interrupt Pin registers. > > >>>> > > >>>> Yes, right. > > >> > > >> Sorry, I didn't see the first item here carefully, so I have to > > >> correct it: all the integrated devices in 7A report 1 in PIN reg > > >> instead of 0. > > > > > >>>>> But I'm still confused about how loongson_map_irq() gets called. The > > >>>>> only likely path I see is here: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> pci_device_probe # pci_bus_type.probe > > >>>>> pci_assign_irq > > >>>>> pci_read_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN, &pin) > > >>>>> if (pin) > > >>>>> bridge->swizzle_irq(dev, &pin) > > >>>>> irq = bridge->map_irq(dev, slot, pin) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> where bridge->map_irq points to loongson_map_irq(). But > > >>>>> pci_assign_irq() should read 0 from PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN [1], so it > > >>>>> wouldn't call bridge->map_irq(). Obviously I'm missing something. > > >> > > >> Same thing, PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN reports 1, so bridge->map_irq() will be > > >> called. > > > > > > OK, that makes a lot more sense, thank you! > > > > > > But it does leave another question: the quirk applies to > > > DEV_PCIE_PORT_0 (0x7a09), DEV_PCIE_PORT_1 (0x7a19), and > > > DEV_PCIE_PORT_2 (0x7a29). > > > > > > According to the .dtsi [1], all those root ports are at function 0, > > > and if they report INTA, the quirk will also compute INTA. So why do > > > you need to apply the quirk for them? > > > > Oh, yes, I don't think they are required either. The fix is only > > required for multi-func devices of 7A. > > > > Huacai, we should remove PCIE ports from the patch. > > I agree to remove PCIE ports here. But since Bjorn has already merged > this patch, and the redundant devices listed here have no > side-effects, I suggest keeping it as is (but Bjorn is free to modify > if necessary). I'd be happy to update the branch to remove the devices mentioned (DEV_PCIE_PORT_x, DEV_LS7A_OHCI, DEV_LS7A_GPU). But the original patch [2] *only* listed DEV_PCIE_PORT_x, so I'm really confused about what's going on with them. I assume [2] fixed *something*, but now we're suggesting that we don't need it. [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210514080025.1828197-5-chenhuacai@xxxxxxxxxxx/
