[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150430172723.GU5622@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 19:27:23 +0200
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>, mst@...hat.com,
plagnioj@...osoft.com, tomi.valkeinen@...com, airlied@...ux.ie,
daniel.vetter@...el.com, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
luto@...capital.net, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@...com>,
Suresh Siddha <sbsiddha@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...ll.ch>,
Dave Airlie <airlied@...hat.com>,
Antonino Daplas <adaplas@...il.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com,
Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@...onical.com>,
Ville Syrjälä <syrjala@....fi>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com, ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com,
david.vrabel@...rix.com, jbeulich@...e.com,
Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>,
xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] lib: devres: add pcim_iomap_wc() variants
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:26:47AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc linux-pci]
>
> Hi Luis,
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 02:36:09PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
> >
> > Now that we have pci_iomap_wc() add the respective devres helpers.
>
> I guess I'm still confused about the relationship between pci_iomap_wc()
> and arch_phys_wc_add().
>
> Do you expect every caller of pcim_iomap_wc() to also call
> arch_phys_wc_add()?
Yeap.
> If so, I'm not sure how pcim_iomap_wc() fits into the picture. A driver
> can call both pcim_iomap_wc() and arch_phys_wc_add(), but the driver
> doesn't explicitly do the unmap, so where would the arch_phys_wc_del()
> happen?
As with other current drivers not using devres, upon exit or where they
would otherwise typically iounmap().
> If not, how does a driver know whether it should call arch_phys_wc_add()?
Sadly they'd have to figure it out, as Andy notes arch_phys_wc_add() is
a hack so I think we need to leave it as such and hope to see arch_phys_wc_add()
use phased as it won't be needed anymore really. arch_phys_wc_add() really should
only be used by device drivers that know that are working with non-PAT systems.
The code already takes care of this but since its an x86 write-combining hack
we should not consider meshing it with devres.
> > ...
> > /**
> > + * pcim_iomap_wc_regions - Request and iomap PCI BARs with write-combining
> > + * @pdev: PCI device to map IO resources for
> > + * @mask: Mask of BARs to request and iomap
> > + * @name: Name used when requesting regions
> > + *
> > + * Request and iomap regions specified by @mask with a preference for
> > + * write-combining.
> > + */
> > +int pcim_iomap_wc_regions(struct pci_dev *pdev, int mask, const char *name)
> > +{
> > + void __iomem * const *iomap;
> > + int i, rc;
> > +
> > + iomap = pcim_iomap_table(pdev);
> > + if (!iomap)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < DEVICE_COUNT_RESOURCE; i++) {
> > + unsigned long len;
> > +
> > + if (!(mask & (1 << i)))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + rc = -EINVAL;
> > + len = pci_resource_len(pdev, i);
> > + if (!len)
> > + goto err_inval;
> > +
> > + rc = pci_request_region(pdev, i, name);
> > + if (rc)
> > + goto err_inval;
> > +
> > + rc = -ENOMEM;
> > + if (!pcim_iomap_wc(pdev, i, 0))
> > + goto err_region;
>
> Is there a user for this? Are there really devices where *all* the BARs
> can be mapped with WC? Are there enough of them to make it worth adding
> this?
Not right now, I did this more to help with a friend who is testing one
driver for a feature. The driver is upstream but a way to make the feature
take effect only under certain conditions still would need to be done.
> I don't see users of either pcim_iomap_wc() or pcim_iomap_wc_regions() so
> far. Did I miss them, or do you just expect them in the near future?
The later, and also I hate seeing folks later add code under EXPORT_SYMBOL()
rather than EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() so I figure I'd rather do it first. It happened
recently in my v1 series, someone beat me to a write-combining export symbol
and changed it to EXPORT_SYMBOL(). Feel free to drop this though but I hope
no one out there then tries to just add an EXPORT_SYMBOL() later for this...
Luis
--
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