Hi Jim,
Thanks for comments!
On 12/11/24 10:01 PM, James Quinlan wrote:
> On 10/25/24 08:45, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
>> On RPi5 there is an external MIP MSI-X interrupt controller
>> which can handle up to 64 interrupts.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> v3 -> v4:
>> - no changes.
>>
>> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c b/drivers/pci/
>> controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
>> index c01462b07eea..af01a7915c94 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-brcmstb.c
>> @@ -1318,6 +1318,52 @@ static int brcm_pcie_start_link(struct
>> brcm_pcie *pcie)
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +static int brcm_pcie_enable_external_msix(struct brcm_pcie *pcie,
>> + struct device_node *msi_np)
>> +{
>> + struct inbound_win inbound_wins[PCIE_BRCM_MAX_INBOUND_WINS];
>> + u64 msi_pci_addr, msi_phys_addr;
>> + struct resource r;
>> + int mip_bar, ret;
>> + u32 val, reg;
>> +
>> + ret = of_property_read_reg(msi_np, 1, &msi_pci_addr, NULL);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + ret = of_address_to_resource(msi_np, 0, &r);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + msi_phys_addr = r.start;
>> +
>> + /* Find free inbound window for MIP access */
>> + mip_bar = brcm_pcie_get_inbound_wins(pcie, inbound_wins);
>> + if (mip_bar < 0)
>> + return mip_bar;
>> +
>> + mip_bar += 1;
>> + reg = brcm_bar_reg_offset(mip_bar);
>> +
>> + val = lower_32_bits(msi_pci_addr);
>> + val |= brcm_pcie_encode_ibar_size(SZ_4K);
>> + writel(val, pcie->base + reg);
>> +
>> + val = upper_32_bits(msi_pci_addr);
>> + writel(val, pcie->base + reg + 4);
>> +
>> + reg = brcm_ubus_reg_offset(mip_bar);
>> +
>> + val = lower_32_bits(msi_phys_addr);
>> + val |= PCIE_MISC_UBUS_BAR1_CONFIG_REMAP_ACCESS_EN_MASK;
>> + writel(val, pcie->base + reg);
>> +
>> + val = upper_32_bits(msi_phys_addr);
>> + writel(val, pcie->base + reg + 4);
>
> Hi Stan,
>
> It looks like all this is doing is setting up an identity-mapped inbound
> window, is that correct? If so, couldn't you get the same effect by
> adding an identity-mapped dma-range in the PCIe DT node?
Yes, that approach could work, I verified it.
Do you want me to drop this patch from the series and make the relevant
changes in PCIe dma-ranges properties?
~Stan
