Received: by 2002:a25:8b12:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i18csp2186526ybl; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 07:53:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyni3ef/YJUGQ2XxESLQkgTT7fXIuHKW32xLYD8Savv8L6UQh5JaEKq2vYP49kOy3Qqg4s8 X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:37a7:: with SMTP id v36mr2493289pjb.3.1565880829085; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 07:53:49 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1565880829; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=TZL/wn49lHftfHd7qxMAvNOnyykiJ98ciGaaPyp8hyn2F05iPmkGMpsZ3wZiR50cE+ Sh59l95EQSB45qMWb3cpUX6MmxCYg4sP4BELLfGhPTUGZCrhWDJNaTKBFmW50yxD760X c/+9F4CJB72QEHs9vsguWHiZucOJHludky/G5hI+d7/sO9fbvxdD2WYPTjYpfIv/QvlW rWK92ctoCTmWyjF6clJ962xOdRSG/CD77hGKFTdJrRsIfJY5tqu1TfrpdcmCzUDyBx2X cZFPrXrvoYBSTdDFAfcuDR/+h3KQ1/Fj+vwcMFcv+2mP5gTB8cpd1s5tyS1k8Xwx0pwm UuYw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=R4mffNPLCvpsFQuXknQIbxXMu1lj0IWkfyKatrnkv88=; b=lYchy6F8u+NtggM4jhR0qIlxgrVRuWzFaVHLhKatHHbNQOeTX1UXt/6kRVIouyXLNQ r5Q9Z1G0ygccJpWlRnNCbE6DlTCqCOGTBeuJ0hXBpnxxKsrP+x8AWKUoWc1KfZ8WpDfT /RJOxr9xN5D75c2WPviQN/QH5VTJniW2WOr7KXkDkWksQjEDVwXJwjQ2ywhCnz3VB135 k1WAQ0xREOn7vPN3bZqjjRU+Yt9sV7tulv39Sqhb8Yt8D/fSFIARJAo79scT9Szwvy3a V8fb0issxWkllwixMJqWRYNi8vtpcmzYMA54gz+841K++p9rT8vFJD7jYPQShzZjDLGD 6zuw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c11si1948662pga.118.2019.08.15.07.53.33; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 07:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731621AbfHOMvI (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 08:51:08 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:43702 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730555AbfHOMvG (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 08:51:06 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B30E8344; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 05:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.37.6.20]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0AB473F694; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 05:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 13:51:03 +0100 From: Andrew Murray To: Xiaowei Bao Cc: jingoohan1@gmail.com, gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com, bhelgaas@google.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, shawnguo@kernel.org, leoyang.li@nxp.com, kishon@ti.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, minghuan.Lian@nxp.com, mingkai.hu@nxp.com, roy.zang@nxp.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] PCI: layerscape: Modify the way of getting capability with different PEX Message-ID: <20190815125103.GH43882@e119886-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190815083716.4715-1-xiaowei.bao@nxp.com> <20190815083716.4715-5-xiaowei.bao@nxp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190815083716.4715-5-xiaowei.bao@nxp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1+81 (426a6c1) (2018-08-26) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:37:11PM +0800, Xiaowei Bao wrote: > The different PCIe controller in one board may be have different > capability of MSI or MSIX, so change the way of getting the MSI > capability, make it more flexible. > > Signed-off-by: Xiaowei Bao > --- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c > index be61d96..9404ca0 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c > @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ > > struct ls_pcie_ep { > struct dw_pcie *pci; > + struct pci_epc_features *ls_epc; > }; > > #define to_ls_pcie_ep(x) dev_get_drvdata((x)->dev) > @@ -40,25 +41,26 @@ static const struct of_device_id ls_pcie_ep_of_match[] = { > { }, > }; > > -static const struct pci_epc_features ls_pcie_epc_features = { > - .linkup_notifier = false, > - .msi_capable = true, > - .msix_capable = false, > -}; > - > static const struct pci_epc_features* > ls_pcie_ep_get_features(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep) > { > - return &ls_pcie_epc_features; > + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep); > + struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci); > + > + return pcie->ls_epc; > } > > static void ls_pcie_ep_init(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep) > { > struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep); > + struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci); > enum pci_barno bar; > > for (bar = BAR_0; bar <= BAR_5; bar++) > dw_pcie_ep_reset_bar(pci, bar); > + > + pcie->ls_epc->msi_capable = ep->msi_cap ? true : false; > + pcie->ls_epc->msix_capable = ep->msix_cap ? true : false; > } > > static int ls_pcie_ep_raise_irq(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep, u8 func_no, > @@ -118,6 +120,7 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > struct dw_pcie *pci; > struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie; > + struct pci_epc_features *ls_epc; > struct resource *dbi_base; > int ret; > > @@ -129,6 +132,10 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (!pci) > return -ENOMEM; > > + ls_epc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ls_epc), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!ls_epc) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > dbi_base = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "regs"); > pci->dbi_base = devm_pci_remap_cfg_resource(dev, dbi_base); > if (IS_ERR(pci->dbi_base)) > @@ -139,6 +146,13 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > pci->ops = &ls_pcie_ep_ops; > pcie->pci = pci; > > + ls_epc->linkup_notifier = false, > + ls_epc->msi_capable = true, > + ls_epc->msix_capable = true, As [msi,msix]_capable is shortly set from ls_pcie_ep_init - is there any reason to set them here (to potentially incorrect values)? Thanks, Andrew Murray > + ls_epc->bar_fixed_64bit = (1 << BAR_2) | (1 << BAR_4), > + > + pcie->ls_epc = ls_epc; > + > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcie); > > ret = ls_add_pcie_ep(pcie, pdev); > -- > 2.9.5 >