Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:f347:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d7csp165166pxu; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 23:32:12 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyBeopL0GMcDqgQ/KX+QvCgADI5pJk/j5Ujnq/o/qVlbc+M0dc6ITLyJQtHi8erhCpEBXZY X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:38d6:: with SMTP id r22mr5722054ejd.149.1607067132131; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 23:32:12 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1607067132; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=LiEDjnLyRFXKMg4Q/j4yKG0etpJeClL++Mev1yGFpE93SGL1KqOkEL73ej55T/K+CM LT+CsweH0HEcmRBQl2YcFgHsh9WDMglhopMfBZ/lbOkWVzjotYgYhIydWy/UJJDierEo viReUtufFUbs9bMDlt1qQXBTYOEoA5nLFHzlfLwGvV06fJGeGsL4HoC2znTpXPJgyC0Q 3eLpi6XLb2dacg55eMSr2FxCHOUzk6iCzyMteThheC2FDYXNoMzfCVm48PqrCZyoC2gb P6kjSPmbcjPM0rwOhaLVVbh4Rr2JDMbzcVqOcOK/ZQuZgcICpgO0OiqDniYJFOQn3N9C gFvA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=BXC5TlClpEYD+ovag2sPsKnI5l3hMBu0GjCYfSOMwGw=; b=QBMG6NlbR/WAceKv7uiPQq/3NZskP0VkAd3j+dS3SPk32TIEcQwljJz6455OZvTbqT T4/JhIE7OLiS33wHs/JiWVtCbiOembrLZBh+C6Ss+cGVpF79pemfsmf9H+z/IMYeX4St H8X8Yaw6O829DzUUSo2yexiLprnAW5qB9Y4ul5/WKE80aspSN4Y+y5c3QZ5KPP8628Tr V3rHf8BXZ9dyugU04toJZviqPeOyqUPQV7md70VcE9jlvbd/N4HC2aH2sDXQXvma5eEb 20scKslt7AQ5sn4G73HG02ptQNFRmjrUzSVlo31AK75R6gFS36M0PNzneynGTVn2EwCy TvjA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=prKjsdHP; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id df12si2208727edb.5.2020.12.03.23.31.48; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 23:32:12 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.s=20150623 header.b=prKjsdHP; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728444AbgLDH2C (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 4 Dec 2020 02:28:02 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56950 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726826AbgLDH2C (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2020 02:28:02 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x641.google.com (mail-ej1-x641.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::641]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E164C061A51 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 23:27:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x641.google.com with SMTP id a16so7262638ejj.5 for ; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 23:27:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=intel-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BXC5TlClpEYD+ovag2sPsKnI5l3hMBu0GjCYfSOMwGw=; b=prKjsdHPYCxJJqHauap7GHxj8cUD4UZ4BJLiDyP/AKstEGcTtxxVcK2c7p1LOyoJYc IPc/ldFb9mNo/PZNd+gV0Gg3k8Wonrpv9vAqVT5p0bbyf6HIFU7qsY+Ajh1cj90o7RiM 8CgNv1hJEpkp2wloKsZ/vlegxNbAiH9FFSDE4ndgPCxOkNVb6xYRDm3mZ0JNQ77Mlih8 cig1x/quX2RZJW4dMhAZGkhg+LxFTTWjEMhcZgSgLmqEOy1+6lrftlvZeEgMXYdFHzYW 5rgTljOxRy0kVnQf1xEhrWCRj6W9VdL0noV2a8D3jgcuZkqeY7Glfh5yTJdTqkmufdpf 3Bog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BXC5TlClpEYD+ovag2sPsKnI5l3hMBu0GjCYfSOMwGw=; b=YJeQkvfUsRVt9RE3xmz9f11kDqg6frCfAFexDaJTVQjPGjPpEhK9aw263FCPA3vr48 zSQaxMRksIu0BD/4lfPzaaWNcrTWOQ3esEtGdW9Y7WPeG78rbbzRVztSqXSk7g39ye7X wjmZyTAvkgE3jiQJkMgOZbZJF/N3n+4mLQRsXG3vfIQ21qBDlv5giREF9ELCZcVAqqMq X9auNZqr1pwE7MBhqz2AH7d/jKVOlIZm8pI7R45g5KXQcRKVaxsAqtBhc5fpcSKAW98H 1PP8Xs8gBypOAFdI9FidAkZmnsADpuzrGdSvwYKBRLqCM/UVEEB1hb78VFU7HcZJpEsW t0oA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531zECA94ja6Nsb9r6BfkIJgIKIj+WIwCgwL23i4qSCkL5CJQSPw +kZbqp6hxJJnf5dJtYF5cSzSJQ6CgCfPRRov1D98Fw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:edb2:: with SMTP id sa18mr5658315ejb.264.1607066840004; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 23:27:20 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20201111054356.793390-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <20201111054356.793390-4-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <20201117144935.00006dee@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: From: Dan Williams Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 23:27:16 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/9] cxl/mem: Add a driver for the type-3 mailbox To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Ben Widawsky , linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux PCI , Linux ACPI , Ira Weiny , Vishal Verma , "Kelley, Sean V" , Bjorn Helgaas , "Rafael J . Wysocki" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Dec 3, 2020 at 11:22 PM Dan Williams wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 6:50 AM Jonathan Cameron > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:43:50 -0800 > > Ben Widawsky wrote: > > > > > From: Dan Williams > > > > > > The CXL.mem protocol allows a device to act as a provider of "System > > > RAM" and/or "Persistent Memory" that is fully coherent as if the memory > > > was attached to the typical CPU memory controller. > > > > > > The memory range exported by the device may optionally be described by > > > the platform firmware memory map, or by infrastructure like LIBNVDIMM to > > > provision persistent memory capacity from one, or more, CXL.mem devices. > > > > > > A pre-requisite for Linux-managed memory-capacity provisioning is this > > > cxl_mem driver that can speak the "type-3 mailbox" protocol. > > > > > > For now just land the driver boiler-plate and fill it in with > > > functionality in subsequent commits. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky > > > > I've tried to avoid repeats, so mostly this is me moaning about naming! > > > > Jonathan > > > > > --- > > > drivers/cxl/Kconfig | 20 +++++++++++ > > > drivers/cxl/Makefile | 2 ++ > > > drivers/cxl/mem.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > drivers/cxl/pci.h | 15 ++++++++ > > > 4 files changed, 119 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 drivers/cxl/mem.c > > > create mode 100644 drivers/cxl/pci.h > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/Kconfig b/drivers/cxl/Kconfig > > > index dd724bd364df..15548f5c77ff 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cxl/Kconfig > > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/Kconfig > > > @@ -27,4 +27,24 @@ config CXL_ACPI > > > resources described by the CEDT (CXL Early Discovery Table) > > > > > > Say 'y' to enable CXL (Compute Express Link) drivers. > > > + > > > +config CXL_MEM > > > + tristate "CXL.mem Device Support" > > > + depends on PCI && CXL_BUS_PROVIDER != n > > > + default m if CXL_BUS_PROVIDER > > > + help > > > + The CXL.mem protocol allows a device to act as a provider of > > > + "System RAM" and/or "Persistent Memory" that is fully coherent > > > + as if the memory was attached to the typical CPU memory > > > + controller. > > > + > > > + Say 'y/m' to enable a driver named "cxl_mem.ko" that will attach > > > + to CXL.mem devices for configuration, provisioning, and health > > > + monitoring, the so called "type-3 mailbox". Note, this driver > > > + is required for dynamic provisioning of CXL.mem attached > > > + memory, a pre-requisite for persistent memory support, but > > > + devices that provide volatile memory may be fully described by > > > + existing platform firmware memory enumeration. > > > + > > > + If unsure say 'n'. > > > endif > > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/Makefile b/drivers/cxl/Makefile > > > index d38cd34a2582..97fdffb00f2d 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/cxl/Makefile > > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/Makefile > > > @@ -1,5 +1,7 @@ > > > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > obj-$(CONFIG_CXL_ACPI) += cxl_acpi.o > > > +obj-$(CONFIG_CXL_MEM) += cxl_mem.o > > > > > > ccflags-y += -DDEFAULT_SYMBOL_NAMESPACE=CXL > > > cxl_acpi-y := acpi.o > > > +cxl_mem-y := mem.o > > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/mem.c b/drivers/cxl/mem.c > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..aa7d881fa47b > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/mem.c > > > @@ -0,0 +1,82 @@ > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > > +// Copyright(c) 2020 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. > > > +#include > > > +#include > > > +#include > > > +#include "acpi.h" > > > +#include "pci.h" > > > + > > > +struct cxl_mem { > > > + void __iomem *regs; > > > +}; > > > + > > > +static int cxl_mem_dvsec(struct pci_dev *pdev, int dvsec) > > > +{ > > > + int pos; > > > + > > > + pos = pci_find_ext_capability(pdev, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DVSEC); > > > + if (!pos) > > > + return 0; > > > + > > > + while (pos) { > > > + u16 vendor, id; > > > + > > > + pci_read_config_word(pdev, pos + PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_OFFSET, &vendor); > > > + pci_read_config_word(pdev, pos + PCI_DVSEC_ID_OFFSET, &id); > > > + if (vendor == PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_CXL && dvsec == id) > > > + return pos; > > > + > > > + pos = pci_find_next_ext_capability(pdev, pos, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DVSEC); > > > > This is good generic code and wouldn't cause much backport effort (even if needed > > to bring in a local copy), so perhaps make it a generic function and move to > > core PCI code? > > > > Mind you I guess that can happen the 'second' time someone wants to find a DVSEC. > > > > > + } > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > +static int cxl_mem_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) > > > +{ > > > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > > > + struct cxl_mem *cxlm; > > > + int rc, regloc; > > > + > > > + rc = cxl_bus_prepared(pdev); > > > + if (rc != 0) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "failed to acquire interface\n"); > > > + return rc; > > > + } > > > + > > > + regloc = cxl_mem_dvsec(pdev, PCI_DVSEC_ID_CXL_REGLOC); > > > + if (!regloc) { > > > + dev_err(dev, "register location dvsec not found\n"); > > > + return -ENXIO; > > > + } > > > + > > > + cxlm = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*cxlm), GFP_KERNEL); > > > + if (!cxlm) > > > + return -ENOMEM; > > > + > > > + return 0; > > > +} > > > + > > > +static void cxl_mem_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > > +{ > > > +} > > > > I'd bring this in only when needed in later patch. > > > > > + > > > +static const struct pci_device_id cxl_mem_pci_tbl[] = { > > > + /* PCI class code for CXL.mem Type-3 Devices */ > > > + { PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, PCI_ANY_ID, > > > + PCI_CLASS_MEMORY_CXL, 0xffffff, 0 }, > > > + { /* terminate list */ }, > > > +}; > > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, cxl_mem_pci_tbl); > > > + > > > +static struct pci_driver cxl_mem_driver = { > > > + .name = KBUILD_MODNAME, > > > + .id_table = cxl_mem_pci_tbl, > > > + .probe = cxl_mem_probe, > > > + .remove = cxl_mem_remove, > > > +}; > > > + > > > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); > > > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Intel Corporation"); > > > +module_pci_driver(cxl_mem_driver); > > > +MODULE_IMPORT_NS(CXL); > > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/pci.h b/drivers/cxl/pci.h > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..beb03921e6da > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/drivers/cxl/pci.h > > > @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ > > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > > > +// Copyright(c) 2020 Intel Corporation. All rights reserved. > > > +#ifndef __CXL_PCI_H__ > > > +#define __CXL_PCI_H__ > > > + > > > +#define PCI_CLASS_MEMORY_CXL 0x050210 > > > + > > > +#define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DVSEC 0x23 > > > +#define PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_CXL 0x1E98 > > > > Hmm. The magic question of what to call a vendor ID that isn't a vendor > > ID but just a magic number that talks like a duck and quacks like a duck > > (for anyone wondering what I'm talking about, there is a nice bit of legal > > boilerplate on this in the CXL spec) > > > > This name is definitely not accurate however. > > > > PCI_UNIQUE_VALUE_CXL maybe? It is used for other things than DVSEC (VDMs etc), > > though possibly this is the only software visible use. > > Finally working my way back through this review to make the changes. > If 0x1E98 becomes visible to software somewhere else then this can > become something like the following: > > #define PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_CXL PCI_UNIQUE_VALUE_CXL > > ...or whatever the generic name is, but this field per the > specification is the DVSEC-vendor-id and calling it > PCI_UNIQUE_VALUE_CXL does not have any basis in the spec. > > I will rename it though to: > > PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL > > ...since include/linux/pci_ids.h includes the _ID_ part. > > > > > > > > +#define PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_OFFSET 0x4 > > > +#define PCI_DVSEC_ID_OFFSET 0x8 > > > > Put a line break here perhaps and maybe a spec reference to where to find > > the various DVSEC IDs. > > Ok. > > > > > > +#define PCI_DVSEC_ID_CXL 0x0 > > > > That's definitely a confusing name as well. > > Yeah, should be PCI_DVSEC_DEVICE_ID_CXL Actually, no, the spec calls this the "DVSEC id" so PCI_DVSEC_ID_CXL seems suitable to me. This is from: Table 126. PCI Express DVSEC Register Settings for CXL Device In the CXL 2.0 Specification.