linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] x86, pci, acpi: Move arch-agnostic MMCONFIG (aka ECAM) and ACPI code out of arch/x86/ directory

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <55701A31.808@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 04 Jun 2015 17:28:17 +0800
From:	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
To:	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
	Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>
CC:	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
	Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	"suravee.suthikulpanit@....com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>,
	"msalter@...hat.com" <msalter@...hat.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] x86, pci, acpi: Move arch-agnostic MMCONFIG (aka
 ECAM) and ACPI code out of arch/x86/ directory

Hi Lorenzo,

On 2015年06月02日 21:32, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 09:06:26AM +0100, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> On 26.05.2015 19:08, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 01:49:18PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>> From: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>
>>>>
>>>> ECAM standard and MCFG table are architecture independent and it makes
>>>> sense to share common code across all architectures. Both are going to
>>>> corresponding files - ecam.c and mcfg.c
>>>>
>>>> While we are here, rename pci_parse_mcfg to acpi_parse_mcfg.
>>>> We already have acpi_parse_mcfg prototype which is used nowhere.
>>>> At the same time, we need pci_parse_mcfg been global so acpi_parse_mcfg
>>>> can be used perfectly here.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
>>>> Tested-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/x86/Kconfig               |   3 +
>>>>    arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h |  33 ------
>>>>    arch/x86/pci/acpi.c            |   1 +
>>>>    arch/x86/pci/mmconfig-shared.c | 244 +---------------------------------------
>>>>    arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_32.c     |   1 +
>>>>    arch/x86/pci/mmconfig_64.c     |   1 +
>>>>    arch/x86/pci/numachip.c        |   1 +
>>>>    drivers/acpi/Makefile          |   1 +
>>>>    drivers/acpi/mcfg.c            |  57 ++++++++++
>>>>    drivers/pci/Kconfig            |   7 ++
>>>>    drivers/pci/Makefile           |   5 +
>>>>    drivers/pci/ecam.c             | 245 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>
>>> Why can't we make use of the ECAM implementation used by pci-host-generic
>>> and drivers/pci/access.c?
>>
>> We had that question when I had posted MMCFG patch set separately,
>> please see:
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/3/11/492
>
> Yes, but the real question is, why do we need to have PCI config space
> up and running before a bus struct is even created ? I think the reason is
> the PCI configuration address space format (ACPI 6.0, Table 5-27, page
> 108):
>
> "PCI Configuration space addresses must be confined to devices on
> PCI Segment Group 0, bus 0. This restriction exists to accommodate
> access to fixed hardware prior to PCI bus enumeration".
>
> On HW reduced platforms I do not even think this is required at all,
> we have to look into this to avoid code duplication that might well
> turn out useless.

This is only for the fixed hardware, which will be not available for
ARM64 (reduced hardware mode), but in Generic Hardware Programming
Model, we using OEM-provided ACPI Machine Language (AML) code to access
generic hardware registers, this will be available for reduced hardware
too.

So in ACPI spec, it says: (ACPI 6.0 page 66, last paragraph)

ACPI defines eight address spaces that may be accessed by generic
hardware implementations. These include:
• System I/O space
• System memory space
• PCI configuration space
• Embedded controller space
• System Management Bus (SMBus) space
• CMOS
• PCI BAR Target
• IPMI space

So if any device using the PCI address space for control, such
as a system reset control device, its address space can be reside
in PCI configuration space (who can prevent a OEM do that crazy
thing? :) ), and it should be accessible before the PCI bus is
created.

Thanks
Hanjun
--
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/