Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 19 May 2020 22:43:04 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
To:     Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
Cc:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
        Paul Burton <paulburton@kernel.org>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] dt-bindings: dma: dw: Add max burst transaction
 length property
Message-ID: <20200519171304.GU374218@vkoul-mobl.Dlink>
References: <20200511210138.GN185537@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20200511213531.wnywlljiulvndx6s@mobilestation>
 <20200512090804.GR185537@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20200512114946.x777yb6bhe22ccn5@mobilestation>
 <20200512123840.GY185537@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20200515060911.GF333670@vkoul-mobl>
 <20200515105137.GK185537@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <20200515105658.GR333670@vkoul-mobl>
 <20200515111112.4umynrpgzjnca223@mobilestation>
 <20200517174739.uis3wfievdcmtsxj@mobilestation>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200517174739.uis3wfievdcmtsxj@mobilestation>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 17-05-20, 20:47, Serge Semin wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:11:13PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 04:26:58PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 15-05-20, 13:51, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 11:39:11AM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > > On 12-05-20, 15:38, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 02:49:46PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:08:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:35:31AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 12:01:38AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:05:28PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 02:12:42PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 01:53:00PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > ...
> > > > 
> > > > > > I leave it to Rob and Vinod.
> > > > > > It won't break our case, so, feel free with your approach.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I agree the DT is about describing the hardware and looks like value of
> > > > > 1 is not allowed. If allowed it should be added..
> > > > 
> > > > It's allowed at *run time*, it's illegal in *pre-silicon stage* when
> > > > synthesizing the IP.
> > > 
> > > Then it should be added ..
> > 
> > Vinod, max-burst-len is "MAXimum" burst length not "run-time or current or any
> > other" burst length. It's a constant defined at the IP-core synthesis stage and
> > according to the Data Book, MAX burst length can't be 1. The allowed values are
> > exactly as I described in the binding [4, 8, 16, 32, ...]. MAX burst length
> > defines the upper limit of the run-time burst length. So setting it to 1 isn't
> > about describing a hardware, but using DT for the software convenience.
> > 
> > -Sergey
> 
> Vinod, to make this completely clear. According to the DW DMAC data book:
> - In general, run-time parameter of the DMA transaction burst length (set in
>   the SRC_MSIZE/DST_MSIZE fields of the channel control register) may belong
>   to the set [1, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256].

so 1 is valid value for msize

> - Actual upper limit of the burst length run-time parameter is limited by a
>   constant defined at the IP-synthesize stage (it's called DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE)
>   and this constant belongs to the set [4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256]. (See, no 1
>   in this set).

maximum can be 4 onwards, but in my configuration I can choose 1 as
value for msize

> So the run-time burst length in a case of particular DW DMA controller belongs
> to the range:
> 1 <= SRC_MSIZE <= DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE
> and
> 1 <= DST_MSIZE <= DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE
> 
> See. No mater which DW DMA controller we get each of them will at least support
> the burst length of 1 and 4 transfer words. This is determined by design of the
> DW DMA controller IP since DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE constant set starts with 4.
> 
> In this patch I suggest to add the max-burst-len property, which specifies
> the upper limit for the run-time burst length. Since the maximum burst length
> capable to be set to the SRC_MSIZE/DST_MSIZE fields of the DMA channel control
> register is determined by the DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE constant (which can't be 1
> by the DW DMA IP design), max-burst-len property as being also responsible for
> the maximum burst length setting should be associated with DMAH_CHx_MAX_MULT_SIZE
> thus should belong to the same set [4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256].
> 
> So 1 shouldn't be in the enum of the max-burst-len property constraint, because
> hardware doesn't support such limitation by design, while setting 1 as
> max-burst-len would mean incorrect description of the DMA controller.
> 
> Vinod, could you take a look at the info I provided above and say your final word
> whether 1 should be really allowed to be in the max-burst-len enum constraints?
> I'll do as you say in the next version of the patchset.

You are specifying the parameter which will be used to pick, i think
starting with 4 makes sense as we are specifying maximum allowed values
for msize. Values lesser than or equal to this would be allowed, I guess
that should be added to documentation.

thanks
-- 
~Vinod