Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752663AbaGHWpg (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2014 18:45:36 -0400 Received: from service87.mimecast.com ([91.220.42.44]:45984 "EHLO service87.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751465AbaGHWpe convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jul 2014 18:45:34 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Jul 2014 23:45:29 +0100 From: Liviu Dudau To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Arnd Bergmann , linux-pci , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , linaro-kernel , Tanmay Inamdar , Grant Likely , Sinan Kaya , Jingoo Han , Kukjin Kim , Suravee Suthikulanit , LKML , Device Tree ML , LAKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/9] pci: Introduce pci_register_io_range() helper function. Message-ID: <20140708224529.GB4980@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1404240214-9804-1-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <1404240214-9804-4-git-send-email-Liviu.Dudau@arm.com> <20140708001418.GB22939@google.com> <201407080900.44882.arnd@arndb.de> <20140708212951.GA4555@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20140708212951.GA4555@google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jul 2014 22:45:29.0994 (UTC) FILETIME=[51B0B6A0:01CF9AFE] X-MC-Unique: 114070823453102201 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 10:29:51PM +0100, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 08 July 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 07:43:28PM +0100, Liviu Dudau wrote: > >> > +static LIST_HEAD(io_range_list); > >> > + > >> > +/* > >> > + * Record the PCI IO range (expressed as CPU physical address + size). > >> > + * Return a negative value if an error has occured, zero otherwise > >> > + */ > >> > +int __weak pci_register_io_range(phys_addr_t addr, resource_size_t size) > >> > >> I don't understand the interface here. What's the mapping from CPU > >> physical address to bus I/O port? For example, I have the following > >> machine in mind: > >> > >> HWP0002:00: PCI Root Bridge (domain 0000 [bus 00-1b]) > >> HWP0002:00: memory-mapped IO port space [mem 0xf8010000000-0xf8010000fff] > >> HWP0002:00: host bridge window [io 0x0000-0x0fff] > >> > >> HWP0002:09: PCI Root Bridge (domain 0001 [bus 00-1b]) > >> HWP0002:09: memory-mapped IO port space [mem 0xf8110000000-0xf8110000fff] > >> HWP0002:09: host bridge window [io 0x1000000-0x1000fff] (PCI address [0x0-0xfff]) > >> > >> The CPU physical memory [mem 0xf8010000000-0xf8010000fff] is translated by > >> the bridge to I/O ports 0x0000-0x0fff on PCI bus 0000:00. Drivers use, > >> e.g., "inb(0)" to access it. > >> > >> Similarly, [mem 0xf8110000000-0xf8110000fff] is translated by the second > >> bridge to I/O ports 0x0000-0x0fff on PCI bus 0001:00. Drivers use > >> "inb(0x1000000)" to access it. > > > > I guess you are thinking of the IA64 model here where you keep the virtual > > I/O port numbers in a per-bus lookup table that gets accessed for each > > inb() call. I've thought about this some more, and I believe there are good > > reasons for sticking with the model used on arm32 and powerpc for the > > generic OF implementation. > > > > The idea is that there is a single virtual memory range for all I/O port > > mappings and we use the MMU to do the translation rather than computing > > it manually in the inb() implemnetation. The main advantage is that all > > functions used in device drivers to (potentially) access I/O ports > > become trivial this way, which helps for code size and in some cases > > (e.g. SoC-internal registers with a low latency) it may even be performance > > relevant. > > My example is from ia64, but I'm not advocating for the lookup table. > The point is that the hardware works similarly (at least for dense ia64 > I/O port spaces) in terms of mapping CPU physical addresses to PCI I/O > space. > > I think my confusion is because your pci_register_io_range() and > pci_addess_to_pci() implementations assume that every io_range starts at > I/O port 0 on PCI (correct me if I'm wrong). I suspect that's why you > don't save the I/O port number in struct io_range. > > Maybe that assumption is guaranteed by OF, but it doesn't hold for ACPI; > ACPI can describe several I/O port apertures for a single bridge, each > associated with a different CPU physical memory region. That is actually a good catch, I've completely missed the fact that io_range->pci_addr could be non-zero. > > If my speculation here is correct, a comment to the effect that each > io_range corresponds to a PCI I/O space range that starts at 0 might be > enough. > > If you did add a PCI I/O port number argument to pci_register_io_range(), > we might be able to make an ACPI-based implementation of it. But I guess > that could be done if/when anybody ever wants to do that. No, I think you are right, the PCI I/O port number needs to be recorded. I need to add that to pci_register_io_range(). > > >> Here's what these look like in /proc/iomem and /proc/ioports (note that > >> there are two resource structs for each memory-mapped IO port space: one > >> IORESOURCE_MEM for the memory-mapped area (used only by the host bridge > >> driver), and one IORESOURCE_IO for the I/O port space (this becomes the > >> parent of a region used by a regular device driver): > >> > >> /proc/iomem: > >> PCI Bus 0000:00 I/O Ports 00000000-00000fff > >> PCI Bus 0001:00 I/O Ports 01000000-01000fff > > Oops, I forgot the actual physical memory addresses here, but you got > the idea anyway. It should have been something like this: > > /proc/iomem: > f8010000000-f8010000fff PCI Bus 0000:00 I/O Ports 00000000-00000fff > f8110000000-f8110000fff PCI Bus 0001:00 I/O Ports 01000000-01000fff > > Bjorn > Thanks for being thorough with your review. Best regards, Liviu -- ==================== | I would like to | | fix the world, | | but they're not | | giving me the | \ source code! / --------------- ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/