RE: [PATCH v2 06/10] PCI: layerscape: Modify the way of getting capability with different PEX

[Xiaowei Bao]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@xxxxxx>
> Sent: 2019å8æ23æ 11:40
> To: Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@xxxxxxx>; bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx;
> robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; Leo Li
> <leoyang.li@xxxxxxx>; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxx
> <lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxxx>; arnd@xxxxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> M.h. Lian <minghuan.lian@xxxxxxx>; Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@xxxxxxx>;
> Roy Zang <roy.zang@xxxxxxx>; jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx;
> gustavo.pimentel@xxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> andrew.murray@xxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] PCI: layerscape: Modify the way of getting
> capability with different PEX
> 
> Hi,
> 
> (Fixed Lorenzo's email address. All the patches in the series have wrong email
> id)
> 
> On 23/08/19 8:09 AM, Xiaowei Bao wrote:
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@xxxxxx>
> >> Sent: 2019å8æ22æ 19:44
> >> To: Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@xxxxxxx>; bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx;
> >> robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx; mark.rutland@xxxxxxx; shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx; Leo
> Li
> >> <leoyang.li@xxxxxxx>; lorenzo.pieralisi@xxxxxx; arnd@xxxxxxxx;
> >> gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; M.h. Lian <minghuan.lian@xxxxxxx>;
> >> Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@xxxxxxx>; Roy Zang <roy.zang@xxxxxxx>;
> >> jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx; gustavo.pimentel@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> >> linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; andrew.murray@xxxxxxx
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] PCI: layerscape: Modify the way of
> >> getting capability with different PEX
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 22/08/19 4:52 PM, Xiaowei Bao wrote:
> >>> The different PCIe controller in one board may be have different
> >>> capability of MSI or MSIX, so change the way of getting the MSI
> >>> capability, make it more flexible.
> >>
> >> please use different pci_epc_features table for different boards.
> > Thanks, I think that it will be more flexible to dynamically get MSI
> > or MSIX capability, Thus, we will not need to define the pci_epc_feature for
> different boards.
> 
> Is the restriction because you cannot have different compatible for different
> boards?
Sorry, I am not very clear what your mean, I think even if I use the same compatible
with different boards, each boards will enter the probe function, in there I will get
the MSI or MSIX PCIe capability of the current controller in this board. Why do I need
to define the pci_epc_feature for different boards? 
> 
> Thanks
> Kishon
> 
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Kishon
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Xiaowei Bao <xiaowei.bao@xxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> v2:
> >>>  - Remove the repeated assignment code.
> >>>
> >>>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c | 26
> >>> +++++++++++++++++++-------
> >>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> >>> b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> >>> index 4e92a95..8461f62 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-layerscape-ep.c
> >>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
> >>>
> >>>  struct ls_pcie_ep {
> >>>  	struct dw_pcie		*pci;
> >>> +	struct pci_epc_features	*ls_epc;
> >>>  };
> >>>
> >>>  #define to_ls_pcie_ep(x)	dev_get_drvdata((x)->dev)
> >>> @@ -40,25 +41,26 @@ static const struct of_device_id
> >> ls_pcie_ep_of_match[] = {
> >>>  	{ },
> >>>  };
> >>>
> >>> -static const struct pci_epc_features ls_pcie_epc_features = {
> >>> -	.linkup_notifier = false,
> >>> -	.msi_capable = true,
> >>> -	.msix_capable = false,
> >>> -};
> >>> -
> >>>  static const struct pci_epc_features*
> >>> ls_pcie_ep_get_features(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep)  {
> >>> -	return &ls_pcie_epc_features;
> >>> +	struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep);
> >>> +	struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci);
> >>> +
> >>> +	return pcie->ls_epc;
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>>  static void ls_pcie_ep_init(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep)  {
> >>>  	struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_ep(ep);
> >>> +	struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie = to_ls_pcie_ep(pci);
> >>>  	enum pci_barno bar;
> >>>
> >>>  	for (bar = BAR_0; bar <= BAR_5; bar++)
> >>>  		dw_pcie_ep_reset_bar(pci, bar);
> >>> +
> >>> +	pcie->ls_epc->msi_capable = ep->msi_cap ? true : false;
> >>> +	pcie->ls_epc->msix_capable = ep->msix_cap ? true : false;
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>>  static int ls_pcie_ep_raise_irq(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep, u8 func_no,
> >>> @@
> >>> -118,6 +120,7 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct
> >>> platform_device
> >> *pdev)
> >>>  	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> >>>  	struct dw_pcie *pci;
> >>>  	struct ls_pcie_ep *pcie;
> >>> +	struct pci_epc_features *ls_epc;
> >>>  	struct resource *dbi_base;
> >>>  	int ret;
> >>>
> >>> @@ -129,6 +132,10 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct
> >> platform_device *pdev)
> >>>  	if (!pci)
> >>>  		return -ENOMEM;
> >>>
> >>> +	ls_epc = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*ls_epc), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> +	if (!ls_epc)
> >>> +		return -ENOMEM;
> >>> +
> >>>  	dbi_base = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev,
> IORESOURCE_MEM,
> >> "regs");
> >>>  	pci->dbi_base = devm_pci_remap_cfg_resource(dev, dbi_base);
> >>>  	if (IS_ERR(pci->dbi_base))
> >>> @@ -139,6 +146,11 @@ static int __init ls_pcie_ep_probe(struct
> >> platform_device *pdev)
> >>>  	pci->ops = &ls_pcie_ep_ops;
> >>>  	pcie->pci = pci;
> >>>
> >>> +	ls_epc->linkup_notifier = false,
> >>> +	ls_epc->bar_fixed_64bit = (1 << BAR_2) | (1 << BAR_4),
> >>> +
> >>> +	pcie->ls_epc = ls_epc;
> >>> +
> >>>  	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcie);
> >>>
> >>>  	ret = ls_add_pcie_ep(pcie, pdev);
> >>>