On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 5:15 PM Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Tomasz, > > On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 13:35 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 7:59 PM Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 18:00 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > > Hi Chunfeng, > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 5:45 PM Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, Tomasz, > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 2019-10-10 at 16:50 +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > > > > > MediaTek XHCI host controller does not support 64-bit addressing despite > > > > > > the AC64 bit of HCCPARAMS1 register being set. The platform-specific > > > > > > glue sets the DMA mask to 32 bits on its own, but it has no effect, > > > > > > because xhci_gen_setup() overrides it according to hardware > > > > > > capabilities. > > > Yes, this is what I want to do, maybe need remove DMA mask setting in > > > platform-specific. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Use the XHCI_NO_64BIT_SUPPORT quirk to tell the XHCI core to force > > > > > > 32-bit DMA mask instead. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Figa <tfiga@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.c | 10 +++++----- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.c > > > > > > index b18a6baef204a..4d101d52cc11b 100644 > > > > > > --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-mtk.c > > > > > > @@ -395,6 +395,11 @@ static void xhci_mtk_quirks(struct device *dev, struct xhci_hcd *xhci) > > > > > > xhci->quirks |= XHCI_SPURIOUS_SUCCESS; > > > > > > if (mtk->lpm_support) > > > > > > xhci->quirks |= XHCI_LPM_SUPPORT; > > > > > > + /* > > > > > > + * MTK host controller does not support 64-bit addressing, despite > > > > > > + * having the AC64 bit of the HCCPARAMS1 register set. > > > > > > + */ > > > > > > + xhci->quirks |= XHCI_NO_64BIT_SUPPORT; > > > > > Somes SoCs support 64bits in fact, so can't support this quirk, do you > > > > > encounter any issues without this quirk? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for taking a look at this patch. > > > > > > > > Yes, on MT8183 the DMA mask ended up being set to 64 bits, but > > > > according to the information I received from MediaTek, the controller > > > > on that SoC only supports 32 bits. > > > As I know, mt8183 doesn't support memory greater than 4G mode. > > > > > > > We have 4GB of DRAM at 0x40000000-0x140000000 on our board with > > MT8183. What happens if you attempt to use the memory from > > 0x100000000-0x140000000 with the XHCI controller on this SoC? > > Sorry for the late reply. > > I've checked it with USB DE, USB IP supports 64bit on MT8183, so no need > set XHCI_NO_64BIT_SUPPORT. > Would you please help to send a new patch to remove local dma mask > setting, no need set it. > > Thanks a lot > Thanks Chunfeng. Sounds good then. I'll send a follow-up clean-up patch once I catch up after a conference and vacation. :) Best regards, Tomasz > > > > > > > > > > > If some SoCs support only 32 bits and some support 64 bits, we may > > > > either need to use different DT compatible string for them or add a DT > > > > property and set the quirk based on that. Right now in upstream we > > > > have: > > > > > > > > 1) "mediatek,mt8173-xhci", used by: > > > > MT8173 > > > > > > > > 2)"mediatek,mtk-xhci", used by: > > > > MT2712 > > > > MT7622 > > > > MT8183 (not yet upstream, but I suppose it's on the mailing lists) > > > > > > > > Would you be able to check which of the SoCs above report 64 bits but > > > > support only 32? (and so would need this quirk) > > > I'm afraid I can't, almost all MTK SoCs supporting xHCI are using this > > > driver, AC64 should be set rightly according to addressing capability. > > > > > > > Does it mean that only MT8183 may be the only SoC with a problem with > > this capability bit? > > > > Matthias, do you have access to MT2712 and MT7622 devices? I have > > MT8173 and MT8183, so I can check them, but would be good to check > > this on the other ones too. > > > > > > Best regards, > > Tomasz > >
