> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-pci-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-pci- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rob Herring > Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2015 2:43 PM > To: Gabriele Paoloni > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas; arnd@xxxxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; Wangzhou > (B); robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx; Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx; > linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yuanzhichang; Zhudacai; zhangjukuo; > qiuzhenfa; Liguozhu (Kenneth) > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] PCI: Store PCIe bus address in struct > of_pci_range > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 2:44 PM, Gabriele Paoloni > <gabriele.paoloni@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Bjorn > > > > Many Thanks for your reply > > > > I have commented back inline with resolutions from my side. > > > > If you're ok with them I'll send it out a new version in the > appropriate patchset > > > > Cheers > > > > Gab > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 6:21 PM > >> To: Gabriele Paoloni > >> Cc: arnd@xxxxxxxx; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx; Wangzhou (B); > >> robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx; Liviu.Dudau@xxxxxxx; linux- > >> pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yuanzhichang; Zhudacai; zhangjukuo; > >> qiuzhenfa; Liguozhu (Kenneth) > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] PCI: Store PCIe bus address in struct > >> of_pci_range > >> > >> Hi Gabriele, > >> > >> As far as I can tell, this is not specific to PCIe, so please use > "PCI" > >> in > >> the subject as a generic term that includes both PCI and PCIe. > > > > sure agreed > > > >> > >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:17:03PM +0800, Gabriele Paoloni wrote: > >> > From: gabriele paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > >> > This patch is needed port PCIe designware to new DT parsing > API > >> > As discussed in > >> > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2015- > >> January/317743.html > >> > in designware we have a problem as the PCI addresses in the > PCIe > >> controller > >> > address space are required in order to perform correct HW > >> operation. > >> > > >> > In order to solve this problem commit f4c55c5a3 "PCI: > designware: > >> > Program ATU with untranslated address" added code to read the > >> PCIe > >> > >> Conventional reference is 12-char SHA1, like this: > >> > >> f4c55c5a3f7f ("PCI: designware: Program ATU with untranslated > >> address") > > > > Agreed, will change this > > > >> > >> > controller start address directly from the DT ranges. > >> > > >> > In the new DT parsing API of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() > >> hides the > >> > DT parser from the host controller drivers, so it is not > possible > >> > for drivers to parse values directly from the DT. > >> > > >> > In http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg42540.html we > >> already tried > >> > to use the new DT parsing API but there is a bug (obviously) > in > >> setting > >> > the <*>_mod_base addresses > >> > Applying this patch we can easily set "<*>_mod_base = win- > >> >__res.start" > >> > >> By itself, this patch adds something. It would help me understand > it > >> if > >> the *user* of this new something were in the same patch series. > > > > the user is: "[PATCH v5 2/5] PCI: designware: Add ARM64 support" > > I will ask Zhou Wang to include this patch in his patchset > > > > > >> > >> > This patch adds a new field in "struct of_pci_range" to store > the > >> > pci bus start address; it fills the field in > >> of_pci_range_parser_one(); > >> > in of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() it retrieves the > resource > >> entry > >> > after it is created and added to the resource list and uses > >> > entry->__res.start to store the pci controller address > >> > >> struct of_pci_range is starting to get confusing to non-OF folks > like > >> me. > >> It now contains: > >> > >> u32 pci_space; > >> u64 pci_addr; > >> u64 cpu_addr; > >> u64 bus_addr; > >> > >> Can you explain what all these things mean, and maybe even add one- > line > >> comments to the structure? > > > > sure I can add comments inline in the code > > > >> > >> pci_space: The only uses I see are to determine whether to print > >> "Prefetch". I don't see any real functionality that uses this. > > > > Looking at the code I agree. it's seems to be used only in powerpc > > and microblaze to print out. > > However from my understanding pci_space is the phys.hi field of the > > ranges property: it defines the properties of the address space > associated > > to the PCI address. if you're curious you can find a nice and quick > to read > > "guide" in http://devicetree.org/MPC5200:PCI > > > >> > >> pci_addr: I assume this is a PCI bus address, like what you would > see > >> if > >> you put an analyzer on the bus/link. This address could go in a BAR. > > > > Yes, this is the PCI start address of the range: phys.mid + phys.low > in the > > guide mentioned above > > > >> > >> cpu_addr: I assume this is a CPU physical address, like what you > would > >> see > >> in /proc/iomem and what you would pass to ioremap(). > > > > Yes correct > > > >> > >> bus_addr: ? > >> > > > > According to the guide above, this is the address into which the > pci_address > > get translated to and that is passed to the root complex. Between the > root > > complex and the CPU there can be intermediate translation layers: see > that to > > get pci_address we call "of_translate_address"; this will apply all > the > > translation layers (ranges in the DT) that it finds till it comes to > the root > > node of the DT (thus retrieving the CPU address). > > Now said that, for designware we need the first translated PCI > address, that we call > > I think you mean "translated CPU address." The flow of addresses looks > like this: > > CPU -> CPU bus address -> bus fabric address decoding -> bus address > -> DW PCI -> PCI address > > This is quite common that an IP block does not see the full address. > It is unusual that the IP block needs to know its full address on the > slave side. It is quite common for the master side and the kernel > deals with that all the time with DMA mapping > > > here bus_addr after Rob Herring suggested the name...honestly I > cannot think of a > > different name > > Thinking about this some more, is this really a translation versus > just a stripping of high bits? Does the DW IP have less than 32-bits > address? If so, we could express differently and just mask the CPU > address within the driver instead. I don’t think we should rely on PCI addresses...what if the intermediate translation layer changes the lower significant bits of the "bus address" to translate into a cpu address? In that case we're going to program the DW with a wrong address What I am saying is that the DW driver should not rely on the behavior of external HW....what do you think? > > Rob > -- > 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 ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���"�)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
