On Sat, May 09, 2015 at 10:18:42AM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >On 05/01/2015 04:02 PM, Gavin Shan wrote: >>The patch enables M64 window on P7IOC, which has been enabled on >>PHB3. Comparing to PHB3, there are 16 M64 BARs and each of them >>are divided to 8 segments. > >"compared to something" means you will tell about PHB3 too :) >
Ok. I'll add something about PHB3 in next revision. >Do I understand correctly that IODA==IODA1==P7IOC and P7IOC != IODA2? The >code does not use "PHB3" or "P7IOC" acronym so it is a bit confusing. > > Your understanding is correct. >>So each PHB can support 128 M64 segments. >>Also, P7IOC has M64DT, which helps mapping one particular M64 >>segment# to arbitrary PE#. However, we just provide 128 M64 (16 BARs) >>segments and fixed mapping between PE# and M64 segment# in order >>to keep same logic to support M64 for PHB3 and P7IOC. In turn, we >>just need different phb->init_m64() hooks for P7IOC and PHB3. >> >>Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gws...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >>--- >> arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c | 115 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 1 file changed, 103 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> >>diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c >>b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c >>index f8bc950..646962f 100644 >>--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c >>+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/pci-ioda.c >>@@ -165,6 +165,67 @@ static void pnv_ioda_free_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb, int pe) >> clear_bit(pe, phb->ioda.pe_alloc); >> } >> >>+static int pnv_ioda1_init_m64(struct pnv_phb *phb) >>+{ >>+ struct resource *r; >>+ int seg; >>+ s64 rc; > >Here @rc is of the "s64" type. > Ok. I'll have "int64_t rc" as you pointed in the following replies. >>+ >>+ /* Each PHB supports 16 separate M64 BARs, each of which are >>+ * divided into 8 segments. So there are number of M64 segments >>+ * as total PE#, which is 128. >>+ */ > >"there are as many M64 segments as a maximum number of PEs which is 128"? > Thanks, your description is obviously more clear. I will have it in next revision. >>+ for (seg = 0; seg < phb->ioda.total_pe; seg += 8) { >>+ unsigned long base; >>+ >>+ base = phb->ioda.m64_base + seg * phb->ioda.m64_segsize; >>+ rc = opal_pci_set_phb_mem_window(phb->opal_id, >>+ OPAL_M64_WINDOW_TYPE, >>+ seg / 8, >>+ base, >>+ 0, /* unused */ >>+ 8 * phb->ioda.m64_segsize); >>+ if (rc != OPAL_SUCCESS) { >>+ pr_warn(" Failure %lld configuring M64 BAR#%d on >>PHB#%d\n", >>+ rc, seg / 8, phb->hose->global_number); >>+ goto fail; >>+ } >>+ >>+ rc = opal_pci_phb_mmio_enable(phb->opal_id, >>+ OPAL_M64_WINDOW_TYPE, >>+ seg / 8, >>+ OPAL_ENABLE_M64_SPLIT); >>+ if (rc != OPAL_SUCCESS) { >>+ pr_warn(" Failure %lld enabling M64 BAR#%d on >>PHB#%d\n", >>+ rc, seg / 8, phb->hose->global_number); >>+ goto fail; >>+ } >>+ } >>+ >>+ /* Strip of the segment used by the reserved PE, which >>+ * is expected to be 0 or last supported PE# >>+ */ >>+ r = &phb->hose->mem_resources[1]; > >mem_resources[0] is IO, mem_resources[1] is MMIO, mem_resources[2] is for >what? Would be nice to have this commented somewhere. > The fixed layout is determined by skiboot firmware. mem_resource[2] is for 64-bits prefetchable MMIO. I'll see if I can put some comments about them somewhere in next revision. >>+ if (phb->ioda.reserved_pe == 0) >>+ r->start += phb->ioda.m64_segsize; >>+ else if (phb->ioda.reserved_pe == (phb->ioda.total_pe - 1)) >>+ r->end -= phb->ioda.m64_segsize; >>+ else >>+ pr_warn(" Cannot strip M64 segment for reserved PE#%d\n", >>+ phb->ioda.reserved_pe); >>+ >>+ return 0; >>+ >>+fail: >>+ for ( ; seg >= 0; seg -= 8) >>+ opal_pci_phb_mmio_enable(phb->opal_id, >>+ OPAL_M64_WINDOW_TYPE, >>+ seg / 8, >>+ OPAL_DISABLE_M64); > >Out of curiosity - is not there a counterpart for >opal_pci_set_phb_mem_window() for cleanup? > > No. >>+ >>+ return -EIO; >>+} >>+ >> /* The default M64 BAR is shared by all PEs */ >> static int pnv_ioda2_init_m64(struct pnv_phb *phb) >> { >>@@ -222,7 +283,7 @@ fail: >> return -EIO; >> } >> >>-static void pnv_ioda2_reserve_m64_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb) >>+static void pnv_ioda_reserve_m64_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb) >> { >> resource_size_t sgsz = phb->ioda.m64_segsize; >> struct pci_dev *pdev; >>@@ -248,8 +309,8 @@ static void pnv_ioda2_reserve_m64_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb) >> } >> } >> >>-static int pnv_ioda2_pick_m64_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb, >>- struct pci_bus *bus, int all) >>+static int pnv_ioda_pick_m64_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb, >>+ struct pci_bus *bus, int all) >> { >> resource_size_t segsz = phb->ioda.m64_segsize; >> struct pci_dev *pdev; >>@@ -346,6 +407,28 @@ done: >> pe->master = master_pe; >> list_add_tail(&pe->list, &master_pe->slaves); >> } >>+ >>+ /* P7IOC supports M64DT, which helps mapping M64 segment >>+ * to one particular PE#. Unfortunately, PHB3 has fixed > >Why is it "Unfortunately"? This is just the way it is :) > It's true that PHB3 is designed without M64DT while P7IOC has. I think it's a nice thing providing more flexibility: Arbitrary M64 segment can be mapped to any one PE# with its help. So I said "unfortunately" :-) >>+ * mapping between M64 segment and PE#. In order for same >>+ * logic for P7IOC and PHB3, we enforce fixed mapping >>+ * between M64 segment and PE# on P7IOC. >>+ */ >>+ if (phb->type == PNV_PHB_IODA1) { >>+ int64_t rc; > >Here @rc is of the "int64_t" type. And this one and the one above are used >for return code from OPAL API. Make them the same (int64_t or long, up to >you). > Yep. It will be "int64_t rc" as I said above. >>+ >>+ rc = opal_pci_map_pe_mmio_window(phb->opal_id, >>+ pe->pe_number, >>+ OPAL_M64_WINDOW_TYPE, >>+ pe->pe_number / 8, >>+ pe->pe_number % 8); >>+ if (rc != OPAL_SUCCESS) >>+ pr_warn("%s: Failure %lld mapping " >>+ "M64 for PHB#%d-PE#%d\n", >>+ __func__, rc, >>+ phb->hose->global_number, >>+ pe->pe_number); >>+ } >> } >> >> kfree(pe_alloc); >>@@ -360,12 +443,6 @@ static void __init pnv_ioda_parse_m64_window(struct >>pnv_phb *phb) >> const u32 *r; >> u64 pci_addr; >> >>- /* FIXME: Support M64 for P7IOC */ >>- if (phb->type != PNV_PHB_IODA2) { >>- pr_info(" Not support M64 window\n"); >>- return; >>- } >>- >> if (!firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_OPALv3)) { >> pr_info(" Firmware too old to support M64 window\n"); >> return; >>@@ -394,9 +471,23 @@ static void __init pnv_ioda_parse_m64_window(struct >>pnv_phb *phb) >> >> /* Use last M64 BAR to cover M64 window */ >> phb->ioda.m64_bar_idx = 15; >>- phb->init_m64 = pnv_ioda2_init_m64; >>- phb->reserve_m64_pe = pnv_ioda2_reserve_m64_pe; >>- phb->pick_m64_pe = pnv_ioda2_pick_m64_pe; >>+ phb->reserve_m64_pe = pnv_ioda_reserve_m64_pe; > > >reserve_m64_pe() is called once from pnv_pci_ioda_setup_PEs() so it is >IODA-only and in this case reserve_m64_pe != NULL and >pnv_ioda_reserve_m64_pe() will be called always. > >In general, it feels like pnv_phb has too many callbacks while they could be >just direct calls. > We will have another type of IODA compatible PHB soon. I'm not sure if it's legal to reveal its name now. The new PHB won't have M64 support. I do think callbacks give us more flexibility (for supporting M64 or not). Lets keep it. >>+ phb->pick_m64_pe = pnv_ioda_pick_m64_pe; >>+ switch (phb->type) { >>+ case PNV_PHB_IODA1: >>+ phb->init_m64 = pnv_ioda1_init_m64; >>+ break; >>+ case PNV_PHB_IODA2: >>+ phb->init_m64 = pnv_ioda2_init_m64; >>+ break; >>+ default: >>+ phb->init_m64 = NULL; >>+ phb->reserve_m64_pe = NULL; >>+ phb->pick_m64_pe = NULL; >>+ phb->ioda.m64_size = 0; >>+ phb->ioda.m64_segsize = 0; >>+ phb->ioda.m64_base = 0; > >There are just 2 PHB types - IODA1 and IODA2, right? And the fields you reset >after "default" - they have to be zeroes already, no? And on what hardware >would the default branch actuall work? None? > Yeah, you're right those piece of garbage can be removed in next revision. Thanks, Gavin > >>+ } >> } >> >> static void pnv_ioda_freeze_pe(struct pnv_phb *phb, int pe_no) >> > > >-- >Alexey > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev