PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
Subsystems (2)
v2 cover PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
Hello,
This patch series brings a number of fixes to the pci-aardvark driver that allows a much larger number of PCIe devices to be used.
It fixes kernel bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, and has been tested with an IGB NIC and a Marvell SATA PCIe card, which were not working previously.
They should be taken for the 4.14 cycle, as they are all bug fixes.
Changes since v1:
- Rebased on top of v4.14-rc2, in order to resolve a minor conflict with another patch merged in the mean time.
Thanks a lot!
Thomas
Evan Wang (1):
PCI: aardvark: fix PCIe max read request size setting
Thomas Petazzoni (1):
PCI: aardvark: define IRQ related hooks in pci_host_bridge
Victor Gu (5):
PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
PCI: aardvark: set PIO_ADDR_LS correctly in advk_pcie_rd_conf()
PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
PCI: aardvark: use isr1 instead of isr0 interrupt in legacy irq mode
PCI: aardvark: disable LOS state by default
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 116 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 92 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 1/7 PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
The PCI configuration space read/write functions were special casing the situation where PCI_SLOT(devfn) != 0, and returned PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND in this case.
However, will this is what is intended for the root bus, it is not intended for the child busses, as it prevents discovering devices with PCI_SLOT(x) != 0. Therefore, we return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND only if we're on the root bus.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +2 -2
@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,u32 reg;int ret; -if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) { +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 )) { *val =0xffffffff ;return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND ; }
@@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_wr_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,int offset;int ret; -if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ))return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND ;if (where % size)
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 1/7 PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
Quoted 27 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
The PCI configuration space read/write functions were special casing the situation where
PCI_SLOT(devfn)!= 0, and returnedPCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUNDin this case.However, will this is what is intended for the root bus, it is not intended for the child busses, as it prevents discovering devices with
PCI_SLOT(x)!= 0. Therefore, we returnPCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUNDonly if we're on the root bus.Fixes 8c39d710363c1 ("PCI: aardvark: Add Aardvark PCI host controller driver")Cc <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Victor Gu <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Wilson Ding <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Nadav Haklai <[email protected]>[Thomas: tweak commit log.]Signed-off-by Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +0
-0
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn, · line 443
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,u32 reg;int ret; -if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) { +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 )) {
I'm fine with this, but please take a look at these:
8e7ca8ca5fd8 PCI: xilinx: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOV e18934b5e9c7 PCI: designware: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOV d99e30b7936a PCI: altera: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOV
and make sure that reasoning doesn't apply here, too.
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8e7ca8ca5fd8
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e18934b5e9c7
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d99e30b7936a
Quoted 20 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1*val =0xffffffff ;return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND ; }@@ -494,7 +494,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_wr_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,int offset;int ret; -if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ))return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND ;if (where % size)Signature · 7 lines
2.13.5 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
PATCH v2 1/7 PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
Hello Bjorn,
Again, reviving this very old thread :-)
Quoted 9 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn, · line 443
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1-if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) { +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 )) {I'm fine with this, but please take a look at these:
8e7ca8ca5fd8PCI: xilinx: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOVe18934b5e9c7PCI: designware: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOVd99e30b7936aPCI: altera: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOV
Quoted 5 lines
and make sure that reasoning doesn't apply here, too.
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8e7ca8ca5fd8
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e18934b5e9c7
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d99e30b7936a
The original code for xilinx/designware/altera was doing:
if (bus->number == port->root_busno && devfn > 0)
return false;
if (bus->primary == port->root_busno && devfn > 0) return false;
I.e, it was checking both if bus->number *and* bus->primary were equal to port->root_busno.
The commit you points removed the check on bus->primary, keeping the check on bus->number.
Your patch for the Aadvark driver only adds a check on bus->number, i.e exactly what the xilinx/designware/altera code is still doing today:
Altera:
/* access only one slot on each root port */
if (bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr && dev > 0)
return false;Designware:
/* access only one slot on each root port */
if (bus->number == pp->root_bus_nr && dev > 0)
return 0;Xilinx:
/* Only one device down on each root port */
if (bus->number == port->root_busno && devfn > 0)
return false;Aardvark (with our patch):
if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT(devfn) != 0)) {
*val = 0xffffffff;
return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND;
}So we're doing exactly the same thing.
Do you agree ?
Best regards,
Thomas Petazzoni
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 1/7 PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
[+cc Lorenzo, since he takes care of this now]
Quoted 29 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello Bjorn,
Again, reviving this very old thread :-)
Quoted 9 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn, · line 443
Quoted 2 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1-if (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 ) { +if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT (devfn) !=0 )) {I'm fine with this, but please take a look at these:
8e7ca8ca5fd8PCI: xilinx: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOVe18934b5e9c7PCI: designware: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOVd99e30b7936aPCI: altera: Relax device number checking to allow SR-IOVQuoted 5 lines
and make sure that reasoning doesn't apply here, too.
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=8e7ca8ca5fd8
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e18934b5e9c7
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d99e30b7936aThe original code for xilinx/designware/altera was doing:
(quoted diff) +0
-0if (bus->number == port->root_busno && devfn > 0) return false;if (bus->primary == port->root_busno && devfn > 0) return false;
Quoted 8 lines
I.e, it was checking both if
bus->number*and*bus->primarywere equal toport->root_busno.The commit you points removed the check on
bus->primary, keeping the check onbus->number.Your patch for the Aadvark driver only adds a check on
bus->number, i.e exactly what the xilinx/designware/altera code is still doing today:
This is a long time ago and I could have forgotten, but I don't think this is *my* patch, is it?
Quoted 20 lines
Altera:
/* access only one slot on each root port */ if (bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr && dev > 0) return false;Designware:
/* access only one slot on each root port */ if (bus->number == pp->root_bus_nr && dev > 0) return 0;Xilinx:
/* Only one device down on each root port */ if (bus->number == port->root_busno && devfn > 0) return false;Aardvark (with our patch):
Quoted 8 lines
if ((bus->number == pcie->root_bus_nr) && (PCI_SLOT(devfn) != 0)) { *val = 0xffffffff; return PCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND; }So we're doing exactly the same thing.
Do you agree ?
I do agree. I can't remember what I was thinking when I first responded.
I *would* suggest making an advk_pcie_valid_device() so your structure matches the other drivers. I know it seems trivial when you're mostly looking at one driver, but it really helps those who pay attention to all of them.
Bjorn
Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] PCI: aardvark: fix logic in PCI configuration read/write functions
In reply to Thomas Petazzoni[ NB: CC list trimmed ]
Quoted 7 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
The PCI configuration space read/write functions were special casing the situation where
PCI_SLOT(devfn)!= 0, and returnedPCIBIOS_DEVICE_NOT_FOUNDin this case.However, will this is what is intended for the root bus, it is not
*while* this is what is intended?
PATCH v2 2/7 PCI: aardvark: set PIO_ADDR_LS correctly in advk_pcie_rd_conf()
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniFrom: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
When setting the PIO_ADDR_LS register during a configuration read, we were properly passing the device number, function number and register number, but not the bus number, causing issues when reading the configuration of PCIe devices.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1 -1
@@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,advk_writel (pcie, reg,PIO_CTRL );/* Program the address registers */ - reg =PCIE_BDF (devfn) |PCIE_CONF_REG (where); + reg =PCIE_CONF_ADDR (bus->number, devfn, where);advk_writel (pcie, reg,PIO_ADDR_LS );advk_writel (pcie,0 ,PIO_ADDR_MS );
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 2/7 PCI: aardvark: set PIO_ADDR_LS correctly in advk_pcie_rd_conf()
Quoted 23 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
When setting the
PIO_ADDR_LSregister during a configuration read, we were properly passing the device number, function number and register number, but not the bus number, causing issues when reading the configuration of PCIe devices.Fixes 8c39d710363c1 ("PCI: aardvark: Add Aardvark PCI host controller driver")Cc <[email protected]>Signed-off-by Victor Gu <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Wilson Ding <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Nadav Haklai <[email protected]>[Thomas: tweak commit log.]Signed-off-by Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +0
-0
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn, · line 462
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1@@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,advk_writel (pcie, reg,PIO_CTRL );/* Program the address registers */ - reg =PCIE_BDF (devfn) |PCIE_CONF_REG (where); + reg =PCIE_CONF_ADDR (bus->number, devfn, where);
I think PCIE_BDF() is now unused and should be removed.
Quoted 11 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +0
-0advk_writel (pcie, reg,PIO_ADDR_LS );advk_writel (pcie,0 ,PIO_ADDR_MS );Signature · 7 lines
2.13.5 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
PATCH v2 2/7 PCI: aardvark: set PIO_ADDR_LS correctly in advk_pcie_rd_conf()
Hello,
Quoted 7 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 7 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +0
-0@@ -459,7 +459,7 @@ static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn,advk_writel (pcie, reg,PIO_CTRL );
Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c static int advk_pcie_rd_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, u32 devfn, · line 462
Quoted 3 lines
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-1/* Program the address registers */ - reg =PCIE_BDF (devfn) |PCIE_CONF_REG (where); + reg =PCIE_CONF_ADDR (bus->number, devfn, where);I think
PCIE_BDF()is now unused and should be removed.
True, I'll fix this in v3.
Thanks!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniFrom: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Since the Aardvark does not implement a PCIe root bus, the Linux PCIe subsystem will not align the MAX payload size between the host and the device. This patch ensures that the host and device have the same MAX payload size, fixing a number of problems with various PCIe devices.
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +59 -1
@@ -30,8 +30,10 @@#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG 0xc8#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_RELAX_ORDER_DISABLE (0 << 4)#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT 5 +#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ 0x2#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE (0 << 11)#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT 12 +#define PCIE_CORE_MPS_UNIT_BYTE 128#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_CTRL_STAT_REG 0xd0#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_L0S_ENTRY BIT(0)#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_TRAINING BIT(5)
@@ -297,7 +299,8 @@ static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie)/* Set PCIe Device Control and Status 1 PF0 register */ reg =PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_RELAX_ORDER_DISABLE | - (7 <<PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ) | + (PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ << +PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ) |PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE |PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT ;advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG );
@@ -879,6 +882,58 @@ static int advk_pcie_parse_request_of_pci_ranges(struct advk_pcie *pcie)return err; } +static int advk_pcie_find_smpss (struct pci_dev *dev,void *data) +{ +u8 *smpss = data; + +if (!dev) +return 0 ; + +if (!pci_is_pcie (dev)) +return 0 ; + +if (*smpss > dev->pcie_mpss) + *smpss = dev->pcie_mpss; + +return 0 ; +} + +static int advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps (struct pci_dev *dev,void *data) +{ +int mps; + +if (!dev) +return 0 ; + +if (!pci_is_pcie (dev)) +return 0 ; + + mps =PCIE_CORE_MPS_UNIT_BYTE << *(u8 *)data; +pcie_set_mps (dev, mps); + +return 0 ; +} + +static void advk_pcie_configure_mps (struct pci_bus *bus,struct advk_pcie *pcie) +{ +u8 smpss =PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ ; +u32 reg; + +/* Find the minimal supported MAX payload size */ +advk_pcie_find_smpss (bus->self, &smpss); +pci_walk_bus (bus, advk_pcie_find_smpss, &smpss); + +/* Configure RC MAX payload size */ + reg =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG ); + reg &= ~PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_PAYLOAD ; + reg |= smpss <<PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ; +advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG ); + +/* Configure device MAX payload size */ +advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps (bus->self, &smpss); +pci_walk_bus (bus, advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps, &smpss); +} +static int advk_pcie_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) {struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
@@ -950,6 +1005,9 @@ static int advk_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)list_for_each_entry (child, &bus->children, node)pcie_bus_configure_settings (child); +/* Configure the MAX pay load size */ +advk_pcie_configure_mps (bus, pcie); +pci_bus_add_devices (bus);return 0 ; }
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Quoted 3 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Since the Aardvark does not implement a PCIe root bus,
What exactly do you mean by "does not implement a PCIe root bus"? I assume there is still a hierarchy of PCI buses, and I assume the hierarchy has a top-most ("root") bus.
Maybe there's no Root Port? There are other systems that don't have Root Ports, and we've made changes to accommodate that, e.g.,
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/commit/?id=1b8a6079015f
If we can make the generic code work for whatever the Aardvark topology is, that would be better than adding Aardvark-specific code here.
Quoted 117 lines
the Linux PCIe
subsystem will not align the MAX payload size between the host and the device. This patch ensures that the host and device have the same MAX payload size, fixing a number of problems with various PCIe devices.This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.Fixes Fixes: 8c39d710363c1 ("PCI: aardvark: Add Aardvark PCI host controller driver")Signed-off-by Victor Gu <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Evan Wang <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Nadav Haklai <[email protected]>[Thomas: tweak commit log.]Signed-off-by Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +59
-1@@ -30,8 +30,10 @@#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG 0xc8#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_RELAX_ORDER_DISABLE (0 << 4)#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT 5 +#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ 0x2#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE (0 << 11)#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT 12 +#define PCIE_CORE_MPS_UNIT_BYTE 128#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_CTRL_STAT_REG 0xd0#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_L0S_ENTRY BIT(0)#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_TRAINING BIT(5)@@ -297,7 +299,8 @@ static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie)/* Set PCIe Device Control and Status 1 PF0 register */ reg =PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_RELAX_ORDER_DISABLE | - (7 <<PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ) | + (PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ << +PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ) |PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE |PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT ;advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG );@@ -879,6 +882,58 @@ static int advk_pcie_parse_request_of_pci_ranges(struct advk_pcie *pcie)return err; } +static int advk_pcie_find_smpss (struct pci_dev *dev,void *data) +{ +u8 *smpss = data; + +if (!dev) +return 0 ; + +if (!pci_is_pcie (dev)) +return 0 ; + +if (*smpss > dev->pcie_mpss) + *smpss = dev->pcie_mpss; + +return 0 ; +} + +static int advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps (struct pci_dev *dev,void *data) +{ +int mps; + +if (!dev) +return 0 ; + +if (!pci_is_pcie (dev)) +return 0 ; + + mps =PCIE_CORE_MPS_UNIT_BYTE << *(u8 *)data; +pcie_set_mps (dev, mps); + +return 0 ; +} + +static void advk_pcie_configure_mps (struct pci_bus *bus,struct advk_pcie *pcie) +{ +u8 smpss =PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ ; +u32 reg; + +/* Find the minimal supported MAX payload size */ +advk_pcie_find_smpss (bus->self, &smpss); +pci_walk_bus (bus, advk_pcie_find_smpss, &smpss); + +/* Configure RC MAX payload size */ + reg =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG ); + reg &= ~PCI_EXP_DEVCTL_PAYLOAD ; + reg |= smpss <<PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ; +advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG ); + +/* Configure device MAX payload size */ +advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps (bus->self, &smpss); +pci_walk_bus (bus, advk_pcie_bus_configure_mps, &smpss); +} +static int advk_pcie_probe (struct platform_device *pdev) {struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;@@ -950,6 +1005,9 @@ static int advk_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)list_for_each_entry (child, &bus->children, node)pcie_bus_configure_settings (child); +/* Configure the MAX pay load size */ +advk_pcie_configure_mps (bus, pcie); +pci_bus_add_devices (bus);return 0 ; }Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Hello Bjorn,
Quoted 5 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 3 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Since the Aardvark does not implement a PCIe root bus,
Quoted 8 lines
What exactly do you mean by "does not implement a PCIe root bus"? I assume there is still a hierarchy of PCI buses, and I assume the hierarchy has a top-most ("root") bus.
Maybe there's no Root Port? There are other systems that don't have Root Ports, and we've made changes to accommodate that, e.g.,
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/commit/?id=1b8a6079015f
I'm trying to get back (finally) to this topic. Unfortunately, your branch has been rebased, and this commit no longer exists. Do you have an updated pointer about what you suggest to use for systems that don't have Root Ports ?
Thanks!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
[+cc Lorenzo, who maintains this area now]
Quoted 15 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello Bjorn,
Quoted 12 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 3 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Since the Aardvark does not implement a PCIe root bus,
What exactly do you mean by "does not implement a PCIe root bus"? I assume there is still a hierarchy of PCI buses, and I assume the hierarchy has a top-most ("root") bus.
Maybe there's no Root Port? There are other systems that don't have Root Ports, and we've made changes to accommodate that, e.g.,
Quoted 6 lines
I'm trying to get back (finally) to this topic. Unfortunately, your branch has been rebased, and this commit no longer exists. Do you have an updated pointer about what you suggest to use for systems that don't have Root Ports ?
Sorry, about that; here's the upstream commit, FWIW:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ee8bdfb6568d
If the OS sees no Root Port (I haven't seen the full lspci or kernel enumeration log, so I don't know what the topology actually is), I assume you probably have some Endpoints that have valid Link Capabilities, Control, and Status registers. Those refer to the downstream end of the Link, and the Root Port would normally have corresponding registers that refer to the upstream end.
The lack of the Root Port means we can't do any management of those top-level Links, so no ASPM, no MPS, no link width/speed management, etc.
I see that advk_pcie_probe() calls pcie_bus_configure_settings() like all other drivers, and ideally we would try to make that work just like it does on other platforms. The code is:
pci_scan_root_bus_bridge(bridge);
bus = bridge->bus;
list_for_each_entry(child, &bus->children, node)
pcie_bus_configure_settings(child);This MPS setting is all strictly in the PCIe domain (it's not in the Aardvark domain and shouldn't have any Aardvark dependencies), so I would expect the core code to just work, modulo some possible confusion if it expects to find a Root Port but doesn't.
Can you collect "lspci -vv" output and details about what currently goes wrong? Then we'd have something more concrete to talk about.
Bjorn
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Hello,
Quoted 8 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 4 lines
I'm trying to get back (finally) to this topic. Unfortunately, your branch has been rebased, and this commit no longer exists. Do you have an updated pointer about what you suggest to use for systems that don't have Root Ports ?
Sorry, about that; here's the upstream commit, FWIW:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ee8bdfb6568d
Thanks. I don't see how this commit can fix our problem though, see below.
Quoted 20 lines
If the OS sees no Root Port (I haven't seen the full lspci or kernel enumeration log, so I don't know what the topology actually is), I assume you probably have some Endpoints that have valid Link Capabilities, Control, and Status registers. Those refer to the downstream end of the Link, and the Root Port would normally have corresponding registers that refer to the upstream end.
The lack of the Root Port means we can't do any management of those top-level Links, so no ASPM, no MPS, no link width/speed management, etc.
I see that
advk_pcie_probe()callspcie_bus_configure_settings()like all other drivers, and ideally we would try to make that work just like it does on other platforms. The code is:pci_scan_root_bus_bridge(bridge); bus = bridge->bus; list_for_each_entry(child, &bus->children, node) pcie_bus_configure_settings(child);
Quoted 7 lines
This MPS setting is all strictly in the PCIe domain (it's not in the Aardvark domain and shouldn't have any Aardvark dependencies), so I would expect the core code to just work, modulo some possible confusion if it expects to find a Root Port but doesn't.
Can you collect "lspci -vv" output and details about what currently goes wrong? Then we'd have something more concrete to talk about.
With an E1000E PCIe NIC connected, the entire lspci -vvv output is:
# lspci -vv 00:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82572EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper) (rev 06) Subsystem: Intel Corporation PRO/1000 PT Server Adapter Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 32 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 40 Region 0: Memory at e8000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Region 1: Memory at e8020000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Region 2: I/O ports at 1000 [disabled] [size=32] Expansion ROM@e8040000 [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2 Flags: PMEClk- DSI+ D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold+) Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=1 PME- Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ Address: 000000001d1f6f68 Data: 0028 Capabilities: [e0] Express (v1) Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 256 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <512ns, L1 <64us ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE- FLReset- SlotPowerLimit 0.000W DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable+ Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+ RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr+ TransPend- LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L0s, Exit Latency L0s <4us ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp- LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- Capabilities: [100 v1] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UESvrt: DLP+ SDES- TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, ECRCGenCap- ECRCGenEn- ECRCChkCap- ECRCChkEn- MultHdrRecCap- MultHdrRecEn- TLPPfxPres- HdrLogCap- HeaderLog: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Capabilities: [140 v1] Device Serial Number 00-1b-21-ff-ff-c1-c4-fe Kernel driver in use: e1000e
I.e, there is no Root Port. Therefore, I don't see how the kernel can know what is the maximum allowed payload size of the PCIe controller, nor how to adjust the payload size to use. Same for the L0s configuration.
This is why we need those changes, one to update the PCIe controller MPS according to the Maximum Payload Size acceptable by the endpoint, and one to disable L0s entirely to avoid issues with non-L0s compliant devices.
Does that make more sense ?
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Quoted 9 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello,
Quoted 5 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 4 lines
I'm trying to get back (finally) to this topic. Unfortunately, your branch has been rebased, and this commit no longer exists. Do you have an updated pointer about what you suggest to use for systems that don't have Root Ports ?
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Sorry, about that; here's the upstream commit, FWIW:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=ee8bdfb6568d
Thanks. I don't see how this commit can fix our problem though, see below.
Sorry, I didn't mean that commit would fix your problem. It's just an example of another case where generic code incorrectly assumed a Root Port would always be present.
Quoted 70 lines
Quoted 20 lines
If the OS sees no Root Port (I haven't seen the full lspci or kernel enumeration log, so I don't know what the topology actually is), I assume you probably have some Endpoints that have valid Link Capabilities, Control, and Status registers. Those refer to the downstream end of the Link, and the Root Port would normally have corresponding registers that refer to the upstream end.
The lack of the Root Port means we can't do any management of those top-level Links, so no ASPM, no MPS, no link width/speed management, etc.
I see that
advk_pcie_probe()callspcie_bus_configure_settings()like all other drivers, and ideally we would try to make that work just like it does on other platforms. The code is:pci_scan_root_bus_bridge(bridge); bus = bridge->bus; list_for_each_entry(child, &bus->children, node) pcie_bus_configure_settings(child);Quoted 7 lines
This MPS setting is all strictly in the PCIe domain (it's not in the Aardvark domain and shouldn't have any Aardvark dependencies), so I would expect the core code to just work, modulo some possible confusion if it expects to find a Root Port but doesn't.
Can you collect "lspci -vv" output and details about what currently goes wrong? Then we'd have something more concrete to talk about.
With an E1000E PCIe NIC connected, the entire lspci -vvv output is:
# lspci -vv 00:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82572EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper) (rev 06) Subsystem: Intel Corporation PRO/1000 PT Server Adapter Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx+ Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx- Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 32 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 40 Region 0: Memory at e8000000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Region 1: Memory at e8020000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Region 2: I/O ports at 1000 [disabled] [size=32] Expansion ROM at e8040000 [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2 Flags: PMEClk- DSI+ D1- D2- AuxCurrent=0mA PME(D0+,D1-,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold+) Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=1 PME- Capabilities: [d0] MSI: Enable+ Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+ Address: 000000001d1f6f68 Data: 0028 Capabilities: [e0] Express (v1) Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 256 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <512ns, L1 <64us ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE- FLReset- SlotPowerLimit 0.000W DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable+ Non-Fatal+ Fatal+ Unsupported+ RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+ MaxPayload 256 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr+ TransPend- LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L0s, Exit Latency L0s <4us ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- ASPMOptComp- LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- CommClk- ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- Capabilities: [100 v1] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UESvrt: DLP+ SDES- TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, ECRCGenCap- ECRCGenEn- ECRCChkCap- ECRCChkEn- MultHdrRecCap- MultHdrRecEn- TLPPfxPres- HdrLogCap- HeaderLog: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Capabilities: [140 v1] Device Serial Number 00-1b-21-ff-ff-c1-c4-fe Kernel driver in use: e1000e
Quoted 4 lines
I.e, there is no Root Port. Therefore, I don't see how the kernel can know what is the maximum allowed payload size of the PCIe controller, nor how to adjust the payload size to use. Same for the L0s configuration.
The Device Control MPS field defaults to 128 bytes. Generic software can only change that default if it knows that every element that might receive a packet from the device can handle it. In this case, we have no information about what the invisible Root Port can handle, so I would argue that we cannot change MPS.
In the lspci above, MPS is set to 256 bytes. If that was done by firmware, it might be safe because it knows things about the Root Port that Linux doesn't. But I don't think the Linux PCI core could set it to 256.
ASPM L0s is similar. We should only enable L0s if we can tell that both ends of the link support it. If there's no Root Port, we don't have any ASPM capability information for the upstream end of the link, so we shouldn't enable ASPM at all.
Quoted 4 lines
This is why we need those changes, one to update the PCIe controller MPS according to the Maximum Payload Size acceptable by the endpoint, and one to disable L0s entirely to avoid issues with non-L0s compliant devices.
The generic core code should perform minimal, guaranteed-to-work configuration using the least information and fewest assumptions possible. That may not lead to optimal performance, but it should at least be functional. This should work even if there is no Root Port.
Once we have that figured out, then we can worry about whether we can or should do platform-specific tweaks to improve performance, e.g., increase MPS if we know Root Port capabilities implicitly.
I had the impression that these patches were required for correct functionality, not just to improve performance. But maybe I misunderstood?
Bjorn
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Hello Bjorn,
Thanks again for this discussion!
Quoted 3 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Sorry, I didn't mean that commit would fix your problem. It's just an example of another case where generic code incorrectly assumed a Root Port would always be present.
OK, understood.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 4 lines
I.e, there is no Root Port. Therefore, I don't see how the kernel can know what is the maximum allowed payload size of the PCIe controller, nor how to adjust the payload size to use. Same for the L0s configuration.
The Device Control MPS field defaults to 128 bytes. Generic software can only change that default if it knows that every element that might receive a packet from the device can handle it. In this case, we have no information about what the invisible Root Port can handle, so I would argue that we cannot change MPS.
Quoted 4 lines
In the lspci above, MPS is set to 256 bytes. If that was done by firmware, it might be safe because it knows things about the Root Port that Linux doesn't. But I don't think the Linux PCI core could set it to 256.
So you're suspecting that the firmware/bootloader has configured the MPS on the E1000E device to 256 bytes ?
Isn't it dangerous for the kernel to rely on the firmware/bootloader configuration ? Indeed, the firmware/bootloader might have configured MPS to X bytes on the endpoint, but when the kernel boots and initializes the PCIe controller, its sets the PCIe controller MPS to Y bytes, with Y > X.
Quoted 4 lines
ASPM L0s is similar. We should only enable L0s if we can tell that both ends of the link support it. If there's no Root Port, we don't have any ASPM capability information for the upstream end of the link, so we shouldn't enable ASPM at all.
Well, even without the Root Port, we are able to use the endpoint configuration space to figure out whether it supports L0s, and adjust the root complex configuration accordingly. This is what our patch is doing for MPS, and which could be done similarly for L0s, no?
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 5 lines
This is why we need those changes, one to update the PCIe controller MPS according to the Maximum Payload Size acceptable by the endpoint, and one to disable L0s entirely to avoid issues with non-L0s compliant devices.
The generic core code should perform minimal, guaranteed-to-work configuration using the least information and fewest assumptions possible. That may not lead to optimal performance, but it should at least be functional. This should work even if there is no Root Port.
Quoted 7 lines
Once we have that figured out, then we can worry about whether we can or should do platform-specific tweaks to improve performance, e.g., increase MPS if we know Root Port capabilities implicitly.
I had the impression that these patches were required for correct functionality, not just to improve performance. But maybe I misunderstood?
I don't myself have the device that wasn't working, and that this patch got to work, so I can't double check myself. However, indeed, I was told that without this fix, some devices would not work.
One question: is it valid/working to have the root complex configured with MPS = 128 bytes but the endpoint configured with MPS = 256 or 512 bytes ? Or should the MPS value be strictly equal on both sides ?
Depending on your answer, there are two options:
- It is a valid situation to have a root complex MPS lower than the endpoint MPS. In this case, we could for now simply unconditionally set the MPS to 128 bytes in the root complex, as a fix to get all devices working. And then separately, work on improving performance by increasing the MPS according to the endpoint capabilities.
- It is not valid for the root complex MPS to be different than the endpoint MPS. In this case, then I don't see how we can do things differently than the proposed patch: we have to see what the endpoint MPS is, and adjust the root complex MPS accordingly. Indeed, the bootloader/firmware might have changed the endpoint MPS so that it is no longer the default of 128 bytes.
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 3/7 PCI: aardvark: set host and device to the same MAX payload size
Quoted 8 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Quoted 6 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
The Device Control MPS field defaults to 128 bytes. Generic software can only change that default if it knows that every element that might receive a packet from the device can handle it. In this case, we have no information about what the invisible Root Port can handle, so I would argue that we cannot change MPS.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 4 lines
In the lspci above, MPS is set to 256 bytes. If that was done by firmware, it might be safe because it knows things about the Root Port that Linux doesn't. But I don't think the Linux PCI core could set it to 256.
So you're suspecting that the
firmware/bootloaderhas configured the MPS on the E1000E device to 256 bytes ?
I didn't word that very well. It looks like *something* set it to 256, but I don't know what. It's possible Linux did, but I think that would be a bug and should be fixed. We'd have to instrument the code or analyze it more closely than I have.
Quoted 11 lines
Isn't it dangerous for the kernel to rely on the
firmware/bootloaderconfiguration ? Indeed, thefirmware/bootloadermight have configured MPS to X bytes on the endpoint, but when the kernel boots and initializes the PCIe controller, its sets the PCIe controller MPS to Y bytes, with Y > X.Quoted 4 lines
ASPM L0s is similar. We should only enable L0s if we can tell that both ends of the link support it. If there's no Root Port, we don't have any ASPM capability information for the upstream end of the link, so we shouldn't enable ASPM at all.
Quoted 4 lines
Well, even without the Root Port, we are able to use the endpoint configuration space to figure out whether it supports L0s, and adjust the root complex configuration accordingly. This is what our patch is doing for MPS, and which could be done similarly for L0s, no?
Yes, this is where it would get machine-specific. I don't know how that should be structured, or even whether it's really worthwhile. I think the core should make it *work* with the least-common-denominator approach, but I'm not convinced that a lot of effort should be put into optimizing a topology that doesn't follow the spec. A driver could do this outside the core, but I think it would be better to put the effort into making the topology more standard.
Why exactly *doesn't* Aardvark expose the Root Port? I assume it does actually exist, since there is actually a link leading to the slot, and there has to be *something* at the upstream end of that link.
Quoted 11 lines
Quoted 3 lines
I had the impression that these patches were required for correct functionality, not just to improve performance. But maybe I misunderstood?
I don't myself have the device that wasn't working, and that this patch got to work, so I can't double check myself. However, indeed, I was told that without this fix, some devices would not work.
One question: is it valid/working to have the root complex configured with MPS = 128 bytes but the endpoint configured with MPS = 256 or 512 bytes ? Or should the MPS value be strictly equal on both sides ?
Per PCIe r4.0, sec 2.2.2, a device cannot transmit a TLP with a payload larger than its MPS. A device receiving a TLP with a payload larger than its MPS must treat the TLP as malformed.
I think that means MPS really should be set the same on both sides so the device can do both DMA reads and writes safely.
Quoted 8 lines
Depending on your answer, there are two options:
- It is a valid situation to have a root complex MPS lower than the endpoint MPS. In this case, we could for now simply unconditionally set the MPS to 128 bytes in the root complex, as a fix to get all devices working. And then separately, work on improving performance by increasing the MPS according to the endpoint capabilities.
Quoted 6 lines
- It is not valid for the root complex MPS to be different than the endpoint MPS. In this case, then I don't see how we can do things differently than the proposed patch: we have to see what the endpoint MPS is, and adjust the root complex MPS accordingly. Indeed, the bootloader/firmware might have changed the endpoint MPS so that it is no longer the default of 128 bytes.
All devices are guaranteed to support MPS = 128 bytes, so if you set the Root Port to that in the driver, we should be able to make the PCI core leave (or set, if necessary) all devices with MPS = 128.
I think we should start with that first, then worry about performance optimizations separately. I guess I'm still just shaking my head over the invisible Root Port mystery. I think the other cases I know about are related to virtualization, where I can sort of understand why the Root Port is missing, but I don't think that's the situation here.
Bjorn
PATCH v2 4/7 PCI: aardvark: use isr1 instead of isr0 interrupt in legacy irq mode
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniFrom: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
The Aardvark has two interrupts sets:
- first set is bit[23:16] of PCIe ISR 0 register(RD0074840h)
- second set is bit[11:8] of PCIe ISR 1 register(RD0074848h)
Only one set should be used, while another set should be masked.
The second set, ISR1, is more advanced, the Legacy INT_X status bit is asserted once Assert_INTX message is received, and de-asserted after Deassert_INTX message is received. Therefore, it matches what the driver is currently doing in the ->irq_mask() and ->irq_unmask() functions. The ISR0 requires additional work to deassert the interrupt, which the driver doesn't do currently.
This commit resolves a number of issues with legacy interrupts.
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +24 -17
@@ -105,7 +105,8 @@#define PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG (CONTROL_BASE_ADDR + 0x4C)#define PCIE_ISR1_POWER_STATE_CHANGE BIT(4)#define PCIE_ISR1_FLUSH BIT(5) -#define PCIE_ISR1_ALL_MASK GENMASK(5, 4) +#define PCIE_ISR1_INTX_ASSERT (val) BIT(8 + (val)) +#define PCIE_ISR1_ALL_MASK GENMASK(11, 4)#define PCIE_MSI_ADDR_LOW_REG (CONTROL_BASE_ADDR + 0x50)#define PCIE_MSI_ADDR_HIGH_REG (CONTROL_BASE_ADDR + 0x54)#define PCIE_MSI_STATUS_REG (CONTROL_BASE_ADDR + 0x58)
@@ -615,9 +616,9 @@ static void advk_pcie_irq_mask(struct irq_data *d)irq_hw_number_t hwirq =irqd_to_hwirq (d);u32 mask; - mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); - mask |=PCIE_ISR0_INTX_ASSERT (hwirq); -advk_writel (pcie, mask,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); + mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG ); + mask |=PCIE_ISR1_INTX_ASSERT (hwirq); +advk_writel (pcie, mask,PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG ); }static void advk_pcie_irq_unmask (struct irq_data *d)
@@ -626,9 +627,9 @@ static void advk_pcie_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *d)irq_hw_number_t hwirq =irqd_to_hwirq (d);u32 mask; - mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); - mask &= ~PCIE_ISR0_INTX_ASSERT (hwirq); -advk_writel (pcie, mask,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); + mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG ); + mask &= ~PCIE_ISR1_INTX_ASSERT (hwirq); +advk_writel (pcie, mask,PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG ); } static int advk_pcie_irq_map(struct irq_domain *h,
@@ -771,29 +772,35 @@ static void advk_pcie_handle_msi(struct advk_pcie *pcie)static void advk_pcie_handle_int (struct advk_pcie *pcie) { -u32 val, mask, status; +u32 isr0_val, isr0_mask, isr0_status; +u32 isr1_val, isr1_mask, isr1_status;int i, virq; - val =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_REG ); - mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); - status = val & ((~mask) &PCIE_ISR0_ALL_MASK ); + isr0_val =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_REG ); + isr0_mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_MASK_REG ); + isr0_status = isr0_val & ((~isr0_mask) &PCIE_ISR0_ALL_MASK ); -if (!status) { -advk_writel (pcie, val,PCIE_ISR0_REG ); + isr1_val =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR1_REG ); + isr1_mask =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_ISR1_MASK_REG ); + isr1_status = isr1_val & ((~isr1_mask) &PCIE_ISR1_ALL_MASK ); + +if (!isr0_status && !isr1_status) { +advk_writel (pcie, isr0_val,PCIE_ISR0_REG ); +advk_writel (pcie, isr1_val,PCIE_ISR1_REG );return ; }/* Process MSI interrupts */ -if (status &PCIE_ISR0_MSI_INT_PENDING ) +if (isr0_status &PCIE_ISR0_MSI_INT_PENDING )advk_pcie_handle_msi (pcie);/* Process legacy interrupts */ for (i =0 ; i <PCI_NUM_INTX ; i++) { -if (!(status &PCIE_ISR0_INTX_ASSERT (i))) +if (!(isr1_status &PCIE_ISR1_INTX_ASSERT (i)))continue ; -advk_writel (pcie,PCIE_ISR0_INTX_ASSERT (i), -PCIE_ISR0_REG ); +advk_writel (pcie,PCIE_ISR1_INTX_ASSERT (i), +PCIE_ISR1_REG ); virq =irq_find_mapping (pcie->irq_domain, i);generic_handle_irq (virq);
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 5/7 PCI: aardvark: disable LOS state by default
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniFrom: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Some PCIe devices do not support LOS, and will cause timeouts if the root complex forces the LOS state. This patch disables the LOS state by default.
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1 -2
@@ -368,8 +368,7 @@ static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie)advk_pcie_wait_for_link (pcie); - reg =PCIE_CORE_LINK_L0S_ENTRY | - (1 <<PCIE_CORE_LINK_WIDTH_SHIFT ); + reg = (1 <<PCIE_CORE_LINK_WIDTH_SHIFT );advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_LINK_CTRL_STAT_REG ); reg =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_CORE_CMD_STATUS_REG );
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 5/7 PCI: aardvark: disable LOS state by default
I assume you mean "ASPM L0s"?
Quoted 5 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Some PCIe devices do not support LOS, and will cause timeouts if the root complex forces the LOS state. This patch disables the LOS state by default.
Per PCIe r3.1, sec 5.4.1.3, software should not enable L0s in either direction unless both ends support L0s.
I'm unclear on what the bug is here. Is the generic ASPM code incorrectly enabling L0s when one end doesn't support it? That seems unlikely, but if so, it should be fixed in the generic ASPM code.
Are both ends advertising L0s support, but there's a hardware erratum on the Aardvark end that keeps it from working correctly? If so, we should say that explicitly and include a reference to a published hardware erratum.
Something else?
Quoted 4 lines
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.
The bugzilla link is a good start, but "reported by the user to be important" is meaningless by itself. What we need here is the details of what's broken and how this fixes it. Unfortunately the bugzilla doesn't have those details.
Quoted 27 lines
Fixes 8c39d710363c1 ("PCI: aardvark: Add Aardvark PCI host controller driver")Signed-off-by Victor Gu <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Evan Wang <[email protected]>Reviewed-by Nadav Haklai <[email protected]>[Thomas: tweak commit log.]Signed-off-by Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +1
-2@@ -368,8 +368,7 @@ static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie)advk_pcie_wait_for_link (pcie); - reg =PCIE_CORE_LINK_L0S_ENTRY | - (1 <<PCIE_CORE_LINK_WIDTH_SHIFT ); + reg = (1 <<PCIE_CORE_LINK_WIDTH_SHIFT );advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_LINK_CTRL_STAT_REG ); reg =advk_readl (pcie,PCIE_CORE_CMD_STATUS_REG );Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 5/7 PCI: aardvark: disable LOS state by default
Hello,
Quoted 14 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 5 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
From: Victor Gu <[email protected]>
Some PCIe devices do not support LOS, and will cause timeouts if the root complex forces the LOS state. This patch disables the LOS state by default.
Per PCIe r3.1, sec 5.4.1.3, software should not enable L0s in either direction unless both ends support L0s.
I'm unclear on what the bug is here. Is the generic ASPM code incorrectly enabling L0s when one end doesn't support it? That seems unlikely, but if so, it should be fixed in the generic ASPM code.
Quoted 6 lines
Are both ends advertising L0s support, but there's a hardware erratum on the Aardvark end that keeps it from working correctly? If so, we should say that explicitly and include a reference to a published hardware erratum.
Something else?
I'll do some more research on this and get back to you.
Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 4 lines
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.The bugzilla link is a good start, but "reported by the user to be important" is meaningless by itself. What we need here is the details of what's broken and how this fixes it. Unfortunately the bugzilla doesn't have those details.
Yes, the issue is that the bug report doesn't have much details, and I don't have the specific PCIe card that was used by the bug reporter.
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
PATCH v2 6/7 PCI: aardvark: fix PCIe max read request size setting
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniFrom: Evan Wang <[email protected]>
There is an obvious typo issue in the definition of the PCIe maximum read request size: a bit shift is directly used as a value, while it should be used to shift the correct value.
This is part of fixing bug
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196339, this commit was reported as the user to be important to get a Intel 7260 mini-PCIe WiFi card working.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +3 -1
@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ 0x2#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE (0 << 11)#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT 12 +#define PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SZ 0x2#define PCIE_CORE_MPS_UNIT_BYTE 128#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_CTRL_STAT_REG 0xd0#define PCIE_CORE_LINK_L0S_ENTRY BIT(0)
@@ -303,7 +304,8 @@ static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie) (PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ <<PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_PAYLOAD_SZ_SHIFT ) |PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_SNOOP_DISABLE | -PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT ; + (PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SZ << +PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_MAX_RD_REQ_SIZE_SHIFT );advk_writel (pcie, reg,PCIE_CORE_DEV_CTRL_STATS_REG );/* Program PCIe Control 2 to disable strict ordering */
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 7/7 PCI: aardvark: define IRQ related hooks in pci_host_bridge
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniCommit 769b461fc0c0 ("arm64: PCI: Drop DT IRQ allocation from pcibios_alloc_irq()") was assuming all PCI host controller drivers had been converted to use ->map_irq(), but that wasn't the case:
pci-aardvark had not been converted. Due to this, it broke the support for legacy PCI interrupts when using the pci-aardvark driver (used on Marvell Armada 3720 platforms).
In order to fix this, we make sure the ->map_irq and ->swizzle_irq fields of pci_host_bridge are properly filled in.
--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +2 -0
@@ -998,6 +998,8 @@ static int advk_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) bridge->sysdata = pcie; bridge->busnr =0 ; bridge->ops = &advk_pcie_ops; + bridge->map_irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci; + bridge->swizzle_irq = pci_common_swizzle; ret =pci_scan_root_bus_bridge (bridge);if (ret <0 ) {
Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 7/7 PCI: aardvark: define IRQ related hooks in pci_host_bridge
[+cc Lorenzo]
Quoted 6 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Commit
769b461fc0c0("arm64: PCI: Drop DT IRQ allocation frompcibios_alloc_irq()") was assuming all PCI host controller drivers had been converted to use ->map_irq(), but that wasn't the case:
pci-aardvark had not been converted. Due to this, it broke the support for legacy PCI interrupts when using the pci-aardvark driver (used on Marvell Armada 3720 platforms).
Lorenzo is pretty thorough, but maybe pci-aardvark.c got overlooked. Cc'ing him just to make sure there's nothing deeper than that.
Quoted 26 lines
In order to fix this, we make sure the ->map_irq and ->swizzle_irq fields of
pci_host_bridgeare properly filled in.Fixes 769b461fc0c0 ("arm64: PCI: Drop DT IRQ allocation from pcibios_alloc_irq()")Signed-off-by Thomas Petazzoni <[email protected]>Cc <[email protected]> # v4.13+--- drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)drivers/pci/host/pci-aardvark.c +2
-0@@ -998,6 +998,8 @@ static int advk_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) bridge->sysdata = pcie; bridge->busnr =0 ; bridge->ops = &advk_pcie_ops; + bridge->map_irq = of_irq_parse_and_map_pci; + bridge->swizzle_irq = pci_common_swizzle; ret =pci_scan_root_bus_bridge (bridge);if (ret <0 ) {Signature · 1 line
2.13.5
PATCH v2 7/7 PCI: aardvark: define IRQ related hooks in pci_host_bridge
Hello,
Quoted 10 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
Quoted 6 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Commit
769b461fc0c0("arm64: PCI: Drop DT IRQ allocation frompcibios_alloc_irq()") was assuming all PCI host controller drivers had been converted to use ->map_irq(), but that wasn't the case:
pci-aardvark had not been converted. Due to this, it broke the support for legacy PCI interrupts when using the pci-aardvark driver (used on Marvell Armada 3720 platforms).Lorenzo is pretty thorough, but maybe
pci-aardvark.cgot overlooked. Cc'ing him just to make sure there's nothing deeper than that.
I talked about this issue with Lorenzo on IRC and then briefly in real life at Linux Plumbers, and I'm pretty sure he agreed that it was just due to the Aardvark driver having been overlooked.
But I'll let him confirm.
Thanks!
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
v2 cover PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
In reply to Thomas PetazzoniHello Bjorn,
Quoted 2 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
This patch series brings a number of fixes to the pci-aardvark driver that allows a much larger number of PCIe devices to be used.
I sent the initial version of this patch series almost a month ago, and it consists of fixes that I would like to have in 4.14.
Is there a specific problem with those patches that explains why they have been ignored? Or is it just lack of time?
If there is any problem with the patches, please let me know, I am of course perfectly fine with reworking them as needed.
Thanks a lot,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
v2 cover PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
[+cc Lorenzo]
Quoted 9 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello Bjorn,
Quoted 2 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
This patch series brings a number of fixes to the pci-aardvark driver that allows a much larger number of PCIe devices to be used.
I sent the initial version of this patch series almost a month ago, and it consists of fixes that I would like to have in 4.14.
The general rule is that after the merge window, I merge fixes to things we put in during the merge window, as well as important regression fixes. Most bug fixes will be queued for the next merge window. I'll need some guidance on classifying these.
I think the map_irq/swizzle_irq patch should definitely be in v4.14. (It looks a lot like these:
1ee4d93d5037 PCI: xilinx-nwl: Move to struct pci_host_bridge IRQ mapping functions 5a3dc3c1f694 PCI: rockchip: Move to struct pci_host_bridge IRQ mapping functions c62e98bdaa70 PCI: xgene: Move to struct pci_host_bridge IRQ mapping functions 6ab380957838 PCI: altera: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
cf60374de8f6 PCI: versatile: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
6982a068aa5f PCI: generic: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
f7c2e69b65fe PCI: faraday: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
60eca198b1ea PCI: designware: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
64bcd00a7ef5 PCI: iproc: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
29db991902ec PCI: rcar: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
cc2eaaef63df PCI: xilinx: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
dd5fcce2a7f9 PCI: tegra: Drop pci_fixup_irqs()
and I'm obsessive enough to use one of those subject lines to tie this patch together with those.)
Most of the rest look like they've been there since the driver was first merged, so they would *probably* go in the v4.15 queue.
Quoted 5 lines
Is there a specific problem with those patches that explains why they have been ignored? Or is it just lack of time?
If there is any problem with the patches, please let me know, I am of course perfectly fine with reworking them as needed.
Sorry for the delay; mostly just lack of time. I used to work pretty strictly first-in, first-out, but the native host bridge drivers consume a disproportionate share of my time compared with the generic code that benefits everybody, so I'm trying to figure out how to prioritize generic changes. Obviously I need a solution that gives *some* time to the native drivers.
Bjorn
v2 cover PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
Hello,
Quoted 21 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
The general rule is that after the merge window, I merge fixes to things we put in during the merge window, as well as important regression fixes. Most bug fixes will be queued for the next merge window. I'll need some guidance on classifying these.
I think the map_irq/swizzle_irq patch should definitely be in v4.14. (It looks a lot like these:
1ee4d93d5037PCI: xilinx-nwl: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functions5a3dc3c1f694PCI: rockchip: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functionsc62e98bdaa70PCI: xgene: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functions6ab380957838PCI: altera: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
cf60374de8f6PCI: versatile: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
6982a068aa5fPCI: generic: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
f7c2e69b65fePCI: faraday: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
60eca198b1eaPCI: designware: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
64bcd00a7ef5PCI: iproc: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
29db991902ecPCI: rcar: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
cc2eaaef63dfPCI: xilinx: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
dd5fcce2a7f9PCI: tegra: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
Quoted 2 lines
and I'm obsessive enough to use one of those subject lines to tie this patch together with those.)
Fine, I'll adjust the commit title to be "PCI: aardvark: Move to struct pci_host_bridge IRQ mapping functions". I also find it nice when commit titles are very consistent, so I can only agree with your obsessiveness on this!
Quoted 2 lines
Most of the rest look like they've been there since the driver was first merged, so they would *probably* go in the v4.15 queue.
I agree that the other patches do not fix regressions but bugs. So it's really up to you as to what you consider a "fix". The Aardvark driver in its current form leaves a lot of PCIe devices unusable, and we get bug reports about this. But admittedly, such PCIe devices have never worked with Aardvark.
Quoted 6 lines
Sorry for the delay; mostly just lack of time. I used to work pretty strictly first-in, first-out, but the native host bridge drivers consume a disproportionate share of my time compared with the generic code that benefits everybody, so I'm trying to figure out how to prioritize generic changes. Obviously I need a solution that gives *some* time to the native drivers.
No problem. I do understand that reviewing all of those native drivers takes a significant amount of time.
Best regards,
Thomas
Signature · 3 lines
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com
v2 cover PCI: aardvark: improve compatibility with PCI devices
In reply to Bjorn HelgaasQuoted 13 lines · Bjorn Helgaas
[+cc Lorenzo]
Quoted 9 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
Hello Bjorn,
Quoted 2 lines · Thomas Petazzoni
This patch series brings a number of fixes to the pci-aardvark driver that allows a much larger number of PCIe devices to be used.
I sent the initial version of this patch series almost a month ago, and it consists of fixes that I would like to have in 4.14.
Quoted 6 lines
The general rule is that after the merge window, I merge fixes to things we put in during the merge window, as well as important regression fixes. Most bug fixes will be queued for the next merge window. I'll need some guidance on classifying these.
I think the map_irq/swizzle_irq patch should definitely be in v4.14.
Yes it is v4.14 (actually v4.13 - Fixes: tag will cover that) material, I missed updating this host bridge while patching all ARM host controller bridges, apologies.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
Quoted 35 lines
(It looks a lot like these:
1ee4d93d5037PCI: xilinx-nwl: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functions5a3dc3c1f694PCI: rockchip: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functionsc62e98bdaa70PCI: xgene: Move to structpci_host_bridgeIRQ mapping functions6ab380957838PCI: altera: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
cf60374de8f6PCI: versatile: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
6982a068aa5fPCI: generic: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
f7c2e69b65fePCI: faraday: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
60eca198b1eaPCI: designware: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
64bcd00a7ef5PCI: iproc: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
29db991902ecPCI: rcar: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
cc2eaaef63dfPCI: xilinx: Droppci_fixup_irqs()
dd5fcce2a7f9PCI: tegra: Droppci_fixup_irqs()and I'm obsessive enough to use one of those subject lines to tie this patch together with those.)
Most of the rest look like they've been there since the driver was first merged, so they would *probably* go in the v4.15 queue.
Quoted 5 lines
Is there a specific problem with those patches that explains why they have been ignored? Or is it just lack of time?
If there is any problem with the patches, please let me know, I am of course perfectly fine with reworking them as needed.
Sorry for the delay; mostly just lack of time. I used to work pretty strictly first-in, first-out, but the native host bridge drivers consume a disproportionate share of my time compared with the generic code that benefits everybody, so I'm trying to figure out how to prioritize generic changes. Obviously I need a solution that gives *some* time to the native drivers.
Bjorn