On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 08:43:47PM +0200, Hauke Mehrtens wrote:
> On 05/13/2015 06:30 PM, Ray Jui wrote:
> > Hi Rafal,
> >
> > On 5/13/2015 9:19 AM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> >> On 13 May 2015 at 17:56, Ray Jui <rjui@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>> On 5/12/2015 11:27 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> >>>> On 12 May 2015 at 23:23, Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> This driver adds support for the PCIe 2.0 controller found on the bcma
> >>>>> bus. This controller can be found on (mostly) all Broadcom BCM470X /
> >>>>> BCM5301X ARM SoCs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The driver found in the Broadcom SDK does some more stuff, like setting
> >>>>> up some DMA memory areas, chaining MPS and MRRS to 512 and also some
> >>>>> PHY changes like "improving" the PCIe jitter and doing some special
> >>>>> initializations for the 3rd PCIe port.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This was tested on a bcm4708 board with 2 PCIe ports and wireless cards
> >>>>> connected to them.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> PCI_DOMAINS is needed by this driver, because normally there is more
> >>>>> than one PCIe controller and without PCI_DOMAINS only the first
> >>>>> controller gets registered.
> >>>>> This controller gets 6 IRQs, the last one is trigged by all IRQ events.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>> Acked-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> +static int iproc_pcie_bcma_probe(struct bcma_device *bdev)
> >>>>> +{
> >>>>> + struct iproc_pcie *pcie;
> >>>>> + LIST_HEAD(res);
> >>>>> + struct resource res_mem;
> >>>>> + int ret;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + pcie = devm_kzalloc(&bdev->dev, sizeof(*pcie), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>>> + if (!pcie)
> >>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + pcie->dev = &bdev->dev;
> >>>>> + bcma_set_drvdata(bdev, pcie);
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + pcie->base = bdev->io_addr;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + res_mem.start = bdev->addr_s[0];
> >>>>> + res_mem.end = bdev->addr_s[0] + SZ_128M - 1;
> >>>>> + res_mem.name = "PCIe MEM space";
> >>>>> + res_mem.flags = IORESOURCE_MEM;
> >>>>> + pci_add_resource(&res, &res_mem);
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + pcie->resources = &res;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + pcie->map_irq = iproc_pcie_bcma_map_irq;
> >>>>> +
> >>>>> + ret = iproc_pcie_setup(pcie);
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I don't like this part of iproc design. It lefts
> >>>> pcie->resources pointing to some random memory after the setup/probe
> >>>> are done. Guess it should be a separated parameter or sth.
> >>>>
> >>>> The patch is still OK, I just refer to generic iproc possible issue.
> >>>>
> >>> Sorry Rafal, but could you please be more specific on this?
> >>
> >> iproc_pcie_pltfm_probe (and iproc_pcie_bcma_probe) have local "res"
> >> variable (each its own). They do:
> >> pcie->resources = &res;
> >> and then they call
> >> iproc_pcie_setup(pcie);
> >>
> >> After iproc_pcie_pltfm_probe / iproc_pcie_bcma_probe returns, the
> >> pointer pcie->resources is not valid anymore, yet pcie struct is still
> >> in use. Of course pcie->resources isn't used anymore, but still, it's
> >> some in-struct pointer (to the random memory since local variable is
> >> not accessible anymore).
> >>
> >> I think you should drop
> >> struct list_head *resources;
> >> from the struct iproc_pcie and use
> >> iproc_pcie_setup(struct iproc_pcie *pcie, struct list_head *resources)
> >>
> >
> > Okay thanks. That makes sense.
> >
> > Or I should keep a copy of the resources under pcie->resources. In the
> > current pcie-iproc.c, the resource is not used anywhere else except when
> > creating the root bus under iproc_pcie_setup. But in the future, I might
> > need to add more code to explicitly program the outbound/inbound windows
> > so this driver can work with some other iProc SoCs where the desired
> > windows do not match power-on-reset values.
> >
> > I plan to change this along with the window programming patch in the
> > future. I also think Hauke's current patch is fine.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ray
> >
> I think parts of this resources are allocated and never freed.
>
> pci_add_resource() allocates some bytes, but I do not see where they are
> freed, this also applies to the platform driver.
Where are we on this patch? I see Ray's ack for [1/2], and a "I think the
current patch is fine"; is that an ack for [2/2] as well?
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
