Date:	Fri, 20 Dec 2013 02:59:29 +0100
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	"David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	mjg59@...f.ucam.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5][RESEND] X86 platform: New BayTrail IOSF-SB MBI driver

On Thursday, December 19, 2013 02:37:46 PM David E. Box wrote:
> From: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> Current Intel SOC cores use a MailBox Interface (MBI) to provide access to unit
> devices connected to the system fabric. This driver implements access to this
> interface on BayTrail platforms. This is a requirement for drivers that need
> access to unit registers on the platform (e.g. accessing the PUNIT for power
> management features such as RAPL). Serialized access is handled by all exported
> routines with spinlocks.
> 
> The API includes 3 functions for access to unit registers:
> 
> int bt_mbi_read(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 *mdr)
> int bt_mbi_write(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr)
> int bt_mbi_modify(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr, u32 mask)
> 
> port:	indicating the unit being accessed
> opcode:	the read or write port specific opcode
> offset:	the register offset within the port
> mdr:	the register data to be read, written, or modified
> mask:	bit locations in mdr to change
> 
> Returns nonzero on error
> 
> Note: GPU code handles access to the GFX unit. Therefore access to that unit
> with this driver is disallowed to avoid conflicts.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> v5: Converted from pnpacpi/mmio driver to pci/config_space driver as
>     necessitated by firmware change.
> 
> v4: Define driver as platform specific to BayTrail as some platforms cannot
>     enumerate the MBI using ACPI as noted by Bin Gao <bin.gao@...ux.intel.com>
>     Renamed register macros and API funcitons to platform specific names.
>     Changed dependency to PNPACPI as sugessted by Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>
> 
> v3: Converted to PNP ACPI driver as sugessted by Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>
>     Removed config visibility to user as suggested by Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> 
> v2: Made modular since there was no longer a reason not to
>     Moved to x86 platform as suggested by Mathhew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
>     Added probe to init to cause driver load to fail if device not detected.
> 
>  drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig          |    8 ++
>  drivers/platform/x86/Makefile         |    1 +
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c |  224 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.h |   90 +++++++++++++
>  4 files changed, 323 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c
>  create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.h
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig b/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> index b51a746..b482e22 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig
> @@ -819,4 +819,12 @@ config PVPANIC
>  	  a paravirtualized device provided by QEMU; it lets a virtual machine
>  	  (guest) communicate panic events to the host.
>  
> +config INTEL_BAYTRAIL_MBI
> +	tristate
> +	depends on PCI
> +	---help---
> +	  Needed on Baytrail platforms for access to the IOSF Sideband Mailbox
> +	  Interface. This is a requirement for systems that need to configure
> +	  the PUNIT for power management features such as RAPL.
> +
>  endif # X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/Makefile b/drivers/platform/x86/Makefile
> index 5dbe193..b3d4cfd 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/Makefile
> @@ -55,3 +55,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_RST)		+= intel-rst.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_SMARTCONNECT)	+= intel-smartconnect.o
>  
>  obj-$(CONFIG_PVPANIC)           += pvpanic.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_INTEL_BAYTRAIL_MBI)	+= intel_baytrail.o
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..f96626b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,224 @@
> +/*
> + * Baytrail IOSF-SB MailBox Interface Driver
> + * Copyright (c) 2013, Intel Corporation.
> + *
> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
> + * under the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public License,
> + * version 2, as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> + *
> + * This program is distributed in the hope it will be useful, but WITHOUT
> + * ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
> + * FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for
> + * more details.
> + *
> + *
> + * The IOSF-SB is a fabric bus available on Atom based SOC's that uses a
> + * mailbox interface (MBI) to communicate with mutiple devices. This
> + * driver implements BayTrail-specific access to this interface.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/spinlock.h>
> +#include <linux/pci.h>
> +
> +#include "intel_baytrail.h"
> +
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(iosf_mbi_lock);
> +
> +static inline u32 iosf_mbi_form_mcr(u8 op, u8 port, u8 offset)
> +{
> +	return (op << 24) | (port << 16) | (offset << 8) | BT_MBI_ENABLE;
> +}
> +
> +static struct pci_dev *mbi_pdev;	/* one mbi device */
> +
> +/* Hold lock before calling */

Which lock?

> +static int iosf_mbi_pci_read_mdr(u32 mcrx, u32 mcr, u32 *mdr)
> +{
> +	int result;
> +
> +	if (!mbi_pdev)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	if (mcrx) {
> +		result = pci_write_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +						BT_MBI_MCRX_OFFSET, mcrx);
> +		if (result < 0)
> +			goto iosf_mbi_read_err;

Why not to call the label just err?

> +	}
> +
> +	result = pci_write_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +					BT_MBI_MCR_OFFSET, mcr);

Doesn't that fit into 80 chars?

> +	if (result < 0)
> +		goto iosf_mbi_read_err;
> +
> +	result = pci_read_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +				       BT_MBI_MDR_OFFSET, mdr);
> +	if (result < 0)
> +		goto iosf_mbi_read_err;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +iosf_mbi_read_err:
> +	dev_err(&mbi_pdev->dev, "error: PCI config operation returned %d\n",
> +		result);

If you said "PCI config access failed with %d\n", you wouldn't need the "error:" thing.

> +	return result;
> +}
> +
> +/* Hold lock before calling */
> +static int iosf_mbi_pci_write_mdr(u32 mcrx, u32 mcr, u32 mdr)
> +{
> +	int result;
> +
> +	if (!mbi_pdev)
> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	result = pci_write_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +					BT_MBI_MDR_OFFSET, mdr);
> +	if (result < 0)
> +		goto iosf_mbi_write_err;
> +
> +	if (mcrx) {
> +		result = pci_write_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +			 BT_MBI_MCRX_OFFSET, mcrx);
> +		if (result < 0)
> +			goto iosf_mbi_write_err;
> +	}
> +
> +	result = pci_write_config_dword(mbi_pdev,
> +					BT_MBI_MCR_OFFSET, mcr);
> +	if (result < 0)
> +		goto iosf_mbi_write_err;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +
> +iosf_mbi_write_err:
> +	dev_err(&mbi_pdev->dev, "error: PCI config operation returned %d\n",
> +		result);
> +	return result;
> +}
> +
> +int bt_mbi_read(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 *mdr)
> +{
> +	u32 mcr, mcrx;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/*Access to the GFX unit is handled by GPU code */
> +	BUG_ON(port == BT_MBI_UNIT_GFX);

Is that a good enough reason to crash the kernel?  Maybe WARN_ON() + return error
would be sufficient?

> +
> +	mcr = iosf_mbi_form_mcr(opcode, port, offset & BT_MBI_MASK_LO);
> +	mcrx = offset & BT_MBI_MASK_HI;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +	ret = iosf_mbi_pci_read_mdr(mcrx, mcr, mdr);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bt_mbi_read);
> +
> +int bt_mbi_write(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr)
> +{
> +	u32 mcr, mcrx;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/*Access to the GFX unit is handled by GPU code */
> +	BUG_ON(port == BT_MBI_UNIT_GFX);

Same comment here.

> +
> +	mcr = iosf_mbi_form_mcr(opcode, port, offset & BT_MBI_MASK_LO);
> +	mcrx = offset & BT_MBI_MASK_HI;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +	ret = iosf_mbi_pci_write_mdr(mcrx, mcr, mdr);
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bt_mbi_write);
> +
> +int bt_mbi_modify(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr, u32 mask)
> +{
> +	u32 mcr, mcrx;
> +	u32 value;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	/*Access to the GFX unit is handled by GPU code */
> +	BUG_ON(port == BT_MBI_UNIT_GFX);

And here.

> +
> +	mcr = iosf_mbi_form_mcr(opcode, port, offset & BT_MBI_MASK_LO);
> +	mcrx = offset & BT_MBI_MASK_HI;
> +
> +	spin_lock_irqsave(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +
> +	/* Read current mdr value */
> +	ret = iosf_mbi_pci_read_mdr(mcrx, mcr & BT_MBI_RD_MASK, &value);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Apply mask */
> +	value &= ~mask;
> +	mdr &= mask;
> +	value |= mdr;
> +
> +	/* Write back */
> +	ret = iosf_mbi_pci_write_mdr(mcrx, mcr | BT_MBI_WR_MASK, value);
> +
> +	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&iosf_mbi_lock, flags);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bt_mbi_modify);
> +
> +static int iosf_mbi_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> +			  const struct pci_device_id *unused)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = pci_enable_device(pdev);
> +	if (ret < 0) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "error: could not enable device\n");
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	mbi_pdev = pci_dev_get(pdev);
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(iosf_mbi_pci_ids) = {
> +	{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, 0x0F00) },
> +	{ 0, },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, iosf_mbi_pci_ids);
> +
> +static struct pci_driver iosf_mbi_pci_driver = {
> +	.name		= "iosf_mbi_pci",
> +	.probe		= iosf_mbi_probe,
> +	.id_table	= iosf_mbi_pci_ids,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init bt_mbi_init(void)
> +{
> +	return pci_register_driver(&iosf_mbi_pci_driver);
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit bt_mbi_exit(void)
> +{
> +	pci_unregister_driver(&iosf_mbi_pci_driver);
> +	if (mbi_pdev) {
> +		pci_dev_put(mbi_pdev);
> +		mbi_pdev = NULL;
> +	}
> +}
> +
> +module_init(bt_mbi_init);
> +module_exit(bt_mbi_exit);
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("BayTrail Mailbox Interface accessor");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.h b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..8bcc311
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_baytrail.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
> +/*
> + * intel_baytrail.h: MailBox access support for Intel BayTrail platforms
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef INTEL_BAYTRAIL_MBI_SYMS_H
> +#define INTEL_BAYTRAIL_MBI_SYMS_H
> +
> +#define BT_MBI_MCR_OFFSET	0xD0
> +#define BT_MBI_MDR_OFFSET	0xD4
> +#define BT_MBI_MCRX_OFFSET	0xD8
> +
> +#define BT_MBI_RD_MASK		0xFEFFFFFF
> +#define BT_MBI_WR_MASK		0X01000000
> +
> +#define BT_MBI_MASK_HI		0xFFFFFF00
> +#define BT_MBI_MASK_LO		0x000000FF
> +#define BT_MBI_ENABLE		0xF0
> +
> +/* BT-SB unit access methods */
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_AUNIT	0x00
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_SMC		0x01
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_CPU		0x02
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_BUNIT	0x03
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_PMC		0x04
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_GFX		0x06
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_SMI		0x0C
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_USB		0x43
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_SATA	0xA3
> +#define BT_MBI_UNIT_PCIE	0xA6
> +
> +/* Read/write opcodes */
> +#define BT_MBI_AUNIT_READ	0x10
> +#define BT_MBI_AUNIT_WRITE	0x11
> +#define BT_MBI_SMC_READ		0x10
> +#define BT_MBI_SMC_WRITE	0x11
> +#define BT_MBI_CPU_READ		0x10
> +#define BT_MBI_CPU_WRITE	0x11
> +#define BT_MBI_BUNIT_READ	0x10
> +#define BT_MBI_BUNIT_WRITE	0x11
> +#define BT_MBI_PMC_READ		0x06
> +#define BT_MBI_PMC_WRITE	0x07
> +#define BT_MBI_GFX_READ		0x00
> +#define BT_MBI_GFX_WRITE	0x01
> +#define BT_MBI_SMIO_READ	0x06
> +#define BT_MBI_SMIO_WRITE	0x07
> +#define BT_MBI_USB_READ		0x06
> +#define BT_MBI_USB_WRITE	0x07
> +#define BT_MBI_SATA_READ	0x00
> +#define BT_MBI_SATA_WRITE	0x01
> +#define BT_MBI_PCIE_READ	0x00
> +#define BT_MBI_PCIE_WRITE	0x01
> +
> +/**
> + * bt_mbi_read() - MailBox Interface read command
> + * @port:	port indicating subunit being accessed
> + * @opcode:	port specific read or write opcode
> + * @offset:	register address offset
> + * @mdr:	register data to be read
> + *
> + * Locking is handled by spinlock - cannot sleep.
> + * Return: Nonzero on error
> + */
> +int bt_mbi_read(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 *mdr);
> +
> +/**
> + * bt_mbi_write() - MailBox unmasked write command
> + * @port:	port indicating subunit being accessed
> + * @opcode:	port specific read or write opcode
> + * @offset:	register address offset
> + * @mdr:	register data to be written
> + *
> + * Locking is handled by spinlock - cannot sleep.
> + * Return: Nonzero on error
> + */
> +int bt_mbi_write(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr);
> +
> +/**
> + * bt_mbi_modify() - MailBox masked write command
> + * @port:	port indicating subunit being accessed
> + * @opcode:	port specific read or write opcode
> + * @offset:	register address offset
> + * @mdr:	register data being modified
> + * @mask:	mask indicating bits in mdr to be modified
> + *
> + * Locking is handled by spinlock - cannot sleep.
> + * Return: Nonzero on error
> + */
> +int bt_mbi_modify(u8 port, u8 opcode, u32 offset, u32 mdr, u32 mask);
> +
> +#endif /* INTEL_BAYTRAIL_MBI_SYMS_H */

Are the users of the interface supposed to include this file?

Rafael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists