Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp3131015pxb; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:49:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzKpmzjz9zKQU56d+4yj8zjDZYxFYY2V1vra04EY7lGZ+or2XxnzgdC7XDbhugr3YXAS1FX X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:228a:: with SMTP id cw10mr4997727edb.195.1611096567451; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:49:27 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1611096567; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=cKwiLDO6BrZea6sMA2MHsySDxjleZk5zhuzVr+qqlO9ph/FocXx4X/XO3cS7D+rdlw RkMJtHwqNTv1Z2P8jipbQvvvAAjmwvuE32cAA2srXOuL6Ir2089aWPWblXLSmJj3+LOe nE6gQh66k3aC20kBhGYU662BZLU9UFDJA/h1WXg8a9zltQuGkX/DS72CwT9pyiVs25kO s5d0nK4uU+hY0f59OaznlB76LK+nuoth5/FIk9UlDb3GCZ1IwEJ8FU9xt29bc2qAd6NE kvoKUmJwag0JSZ1svt9X4ou/RsM8YZ04KQnheE247KTXaCKVhOv2w9Muz+t0Wml0UoO4 UdAg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :dkim-signature; bh=dafNPlVCS4S2LXLJSuTR7hrwH8lsnXzQyIQZkxPQOvY=; b=CqgSI59V5uyO2NOFYxR2w2qYnISj2BrFrRCscpOy0N296S3ocPSPR/WqED4CQbZaud cl99XTe3AtWOeaU5646bSG/B8Gr/zYJLKqkboXkYJOz7avq6F+qFZ/WIJN3a0NETMyvB c+op4l7HmT7atdxX78NmUJ7QMKWXeACnTQnoMVSfSH8Tt1q+wkkiWwONjQ5k5cMPpQQV Nn+1gfiKyM2ASzPvOdwub5OqD8hokH3upUkKzCAX0oLJG/bSnp9eowQCaFf9+QtKfscB KQsIapRPQNgd/R7EW7y4T26WJ3tBDr8P/UfGu+8GwehML3ZL9CtsFfYgXyW4j25XTNyW 1YbQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=hrY1is0f; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id d12si62451ejb.358.2021.01.19.14.48.55; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 14:49:27 -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=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=hrY1is0f; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728157AbhASWrP (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:47:15 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:22567 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727281AbhASWrF (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:47:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1611096331; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dafNPlVCS4S2LXLJSuTR7hrwH8lsnXzQyIQZkxPQOvY=; b=hrY1is0fxV4R3TyOWBhzT4WuWtaMA0Jnm0rqbPeXWb5kLYVvOuUNW2h/ld9UgwYl+uUyDd 2kOpWJBUaqDxIEcQvtCbFwt7cx3SIgCw43IS8YixlDRl7A304/EA17zYEpyyPy6wqUKTha 8qldIQEtG3k14t4QJCesbbCUK3ySVUY= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-516--ZdqYRckNFGsd70TsH0HUg-1; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 17:45:29 -0500 X-MC-Unique: -ZdqYRckNFGsd70TsH0HUg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B21A918C89CF; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 22:45:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omen.home.shazbot.org (ovpn-112-255.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.112.255]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6AA5D9DD; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 22:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 15:45:23 -0700 From: Alex Williamson To: Auger Eric Cc: Vikas Gupta , Cornelia Huck , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vikram Prakash , Srinath Mannam , Ashwin Kamath , Zac Schroff , Manish Kurup Subject: Re: [RFC v3 2/2] vfio/platform: msi: add Broadcom platform devices Message-ID: <20210119154523.00179254@omen.home.shazbot.org> In-Reply-To: <25199e7e-4a42-c69a-0d16-4bf1764ee87b@redhat.com> References: <20201124161646.41191-1-vikas.gupta@broadcom.com> <20201214174514.22006-1-vikas.gupta@broadcom.com> <20201214174514.22006-3-vikas.gupta@broadcom.com> <25199e7e-4a42-c69a-0d16-4bf1764ee87b@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 15 Jan 2021 10:24:33 +0100 Auger Eric wrote: > Hi Vikas, > On 1/15/21 7:35 AM, Vikas Gupta wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > > On Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 2:52 PM Auger Eric wrote: > >> > >> Hi Vikas, > >> > >> On 12/14/20 6:45 PM, Vikas Gupta wrote: > >>> Add msi support for Broadcom platform devices > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Vikas Gupta > >>> --- > >>> drivers/vfio/platform/Kconfig | 1 + > >>> drivers/vfio/platform/Makefile | 1 + > >>> drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig | 9 ++++ > >>> drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Makefile | 2 + > >>> .../vfio/platform/msi/vfio_platform_bcmplt.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 5 files changed, 62 insertions(+) > >>> create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig > >>> create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Makefile > >>> create mode 100644 drivers/vfio/platform/msi/vfio_platform_bcmplt.c > >> what does plt mean? > > This(plt) is a generic name for Broadcom platform devices, which we`ll > > plan to add in this file. Currently we have only one in this file. > > Do you think this name does not sound good here? > > we have VFIO_PLATFORM_BCMFLEXRM_RESET config which also applied to vfio > flex-rm platform device. > > I think it would be more homegenous to have VFIO_PLATFORM_BCMFLEXRM_MSI > in case we keep a separate msi module. > > also in reset dir we have vfio_platform_bcmflexrm.c > > > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/platform/Kconfig > >>> index dc1a3c44f2c6..7b8696febe61 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/Kconfig > >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/Kconfig > >>> @@ -21,3 +21,4 @@ config VFIO_AMBA > >>> If you don't know what to do here, say N. > >>> > >>> source "drivers/vfio/platform/reset/Kconfig" > >>> +source "drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig" > >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/Makefile b/drivers/vfio/platform/Makefile > >>> index 3f3a24e7c4ef..9ccdcdbf0e7e 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/vfio/platform/Makefile > >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/Makefile > >>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ vfio-platform-y := vfio_platform.o > >>> obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_PLATFORM) += vfio-platform.o > >>> obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_PLATFORM) += vfio-platform-base.o > >>> obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_PLATFORM) += reset/ > >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_PLATFORM) += msi/ > >>> > >>> vfio-amba-y := vfio_amba.o > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 000000000000..54d6b70e1e32 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Kconfig > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ > >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > >>> +config VFIO_PLATFORM_BCMPLT_MSI > >>> + tristate "MSI support for Broadcom platform devices" > >>> + depends on VFIO_PLATFORM && (ARCH_BCM_IPROC || COMPILE_TEST) > >>> + default ARCH_BCM_IPROC > >>> + help > >>> + Enables the VFIO platform driver to handle msi for Broadcom devices > >>> + > >>> + If you don't know what to do here, say N. > >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Makefile b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Makefile > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 000000000000..27422d45cecb > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/Makefile > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ > >>> +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >>> +obj-$(CONFIG_VFIO_PLATFORM_BCMPLT_MSI) += vfio_platform_bcmplt.o > >>> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/vfio_platform_bcmplt.c b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/vfio_platform_bcmplt.c > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 000000000000..a074b5e92d77 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/drivers/vfio/platform/msi/vfio_platform_bcmplt.c > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ > >>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > >>> +/* > >>> + * Copyright 2020 Broadcom. > >>> + */ > >>> + > >>> +#include > >>> +#include > >>> +#include > >>> +#include > >>> +#include > >>> + > >>> +#include "../vfio_platform_private.h" > >>> + > >>> +#define RING_SIZE (64 << 10) > >>> + > >>> +#define RING_MSI_ADDR_LS 0x03c > >>> +#define RING_MSI_ADDR_MS 0x040 > >>> +#define RING_MSI_DATA_VALUE 0x064 > >> Those 3 defines would not be needed anymore with that implementation option. > >>> + > >>> +static u32 bcm_num_msi(struct vfio_platform_device *vdev) > >>> +{ > >>> + struct vfio_platform_region *reg = &vdev->regions[0]; > >>> + > >>> + return (reg->size / RING_SIZE); > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +static struct vfio_platform_msi_node vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_node = { > >>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, > >>> + .compat = "brcm,iproc-flexrm-mbox", > >>> + .of_get_msi = bcm_num_msi, > >>> +}; > >>> + > >>> +static int __init vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_module_init(void) > >>> +{ > >>> + __vfio_platform_register_msi(&vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_node); > >>> + > >>> + return 0; > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +static void __exit vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_module_exit(void) > >>> +{ > >>> + vfio_platform_unregister_msi("brcm,iproc-flexrm-mbox"); > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +module_init(vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_module_init); > >>> +module_exit(vfio_platform_bcmflexrm_msi_module_exit); > >> One thing I would like to discuss with Alex. > >> > >> As the reset module is mandated (except if reset_required is forced to > >> 0), I am wondering if we shouldn't try to turn the reset module into a > >> "specialization" module and put the msi hooks there. I am afraid we may > >> end up having modules for each and every vfio platform feature > >> specialization. At the moment that's fully bearable but I can't predict > >> what's next. > >> > >> As the mandated feature is the reset capability maybe we could just keep > >> the config/module name terminology, tune the kconfig help message to > >> mention the msi support in case of flex-rm? > >> > > As I understand, your proposal is that we should not have a separate > > module for MSI, rather we add in the existing reset module for > > flex-rm. Thus, this way reset modules do not seem to be specialized > > just for reset functionality only but for MSI as well. Apart from this > > we need not to load the proposed msi module in this patch series. Is > > my understanding correct? > > yes it is. > > For me it looks OK to consolidate MSI in the existing 'reset' module. > > Let me know your views so that I can work for the next patch set accordingly. > > Before you launch into the rewriting I would like to get the > confirmation Alex is OK or if he prefers to keep separate modules. If I understand correctly, the proposal here creates an entirely parallel vfio-msi request module interface like we have for vfio-reset, so the question is whether we should simplify vfio-platform-core to do a single module request per compat string and the device specific module would register multiple features rather than one per module. Is that right? It seems the submodules are pretty simple, there's not a lot to be gained from duplicate boilerplate code in the modules themselves. The core code would clearly be simplified slightly to avoid multiple module requests, but for a more grand benefit is seems the registration interfaces would also need to be consolidated, perhaps providing a feature "ops" structure. As you indicate, having only two features at this point with a fairly small number of modules each, it's not yet too burdensome, but I could imagine it being a useful project. More importantly in the short term, I'd expect modules handling the same compat string to be named similarly and enabled by a common Kconfig option. Thanks, Alex