Message-ID: <VI1PR0401MB17093077A7F0E3C52AC3392D925D0@VI1PR0401MB1709.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:	Tue, 7 Jun 2016 10:07:40 +0000
From:	Po Liu <po.liu@....com>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
	Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2@...com>
CC:	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Roy Zang <roy.zang@....com>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>,
	Yang-Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>,
	Minghuan Lian <minghuan.lian@....com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Mingkai Hu <mingkai.hu@....com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] aer: add support aer interrupt with none
 MSI/MSI-X/INTx mode

Hi Bjorn,

>  -----Original Message-----
>  
>  On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:01:44AM -0400, Murali Karicheri wrote:
>  > On 06/06/2016 03:32 AM, Po Liu wrote:
>  > > Hi Bjorn,
>  > > I confirm we met same problem with KeyStone base on DesignWare
>  design.
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Best regards,
>  > > Liu Po
>  > >
>  > >>  -----Original Message-----
>  > >>  From: Bjorn Helgaas [mailto:helgaas@...nel.org]
>  > >>  Sent: Saturday, June 04, 2016 11:49 AM
>  > >>  To: Murali Karicheri
>  > >>  Cc: Po Liu; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-
>  > >> kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
>  > >> devicetree@...r.kernel.org; Arnd Bergmann; Roy Zang; Marc Zyngier;
>  > >> Stuart Yoder; Yang-Leo Li; Minghuan Lian; Bjorn Helgaas; Shawn Guo;
>  > >> Mingkai Hu; Rob Herring
>  > >>  Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] aer: add support aer interrupt with none
>  > >> MSI/MSI-X/INTx mode
>  > >>
>  > >>  On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 01:31:11PM -0400, Murali Karicheri wrote:
>  > >>  > Po,
>  > >>  >
>  > >>  > Sorry to hijack your discussion, but the problem seems to be
>  > >> same for  > Keystone PCI controller which is also designware (old
>  version) based.
>  > >>  >
>  > >>  > On 06/03/2016 12:09 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>  > >>  > > On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 11:37:28AM -0400, Murali Karicheri
>  wrote:
>  > >>  > >> On 06/02/2016 09:55 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>  > >>  > >>> On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 05:01:19AM +0000, Po Liu wrote:
>  > >>  > >>>>>  -----Original Message-----  > >>>>>  From: Bjorn Helgaas
>  > >> [mailto:helgaas@...nel.org]  > >>>>>  Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016
>  > >> 11:48 AM  > >>>>>  To: Po Liu  > >>>>>  Cc:
>  > >> linux-pci@...r.kernel.org;  > >>>>>
>  > >> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
>  > >>  > >>>>>  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org;
>  > >> Arnd  > >>>>> Bergmann;  Roy Zang; Marc Zyngier; Stuart Yoder;
>  > >> Yang-Leo Li;  > >>>>> Minghuan Lian; Bjorn  Helgaas; Shawn Guo;
>  > >> Mingkai Hu; Rob  > >>>>> Herring  > >>>>>  Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2]
>  > >> aer: add support aer interrupt with  > >>>>> none  MSI/MSI-X/INTx
>  > >> mode  > >>>>>  > >>>>>  [+cc Rob]  > >>>>>  > >>>>>  Hi Po,  >
>  > >> >>>>>  > >>>>>  On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 02:00:06PM +0800, Po Liu
>  > >> wrote:
>  > >>  > >>>>>  > On some platforms, root port doesn't support
>  > >> MSI/MSI-X/INTx  in RC mode.
>  > >>  > >>>>>  > When chip support the aer interrupt with none
>  > >> MSI/MSI-X/INTx  > >>>>> mode,  > maybe there is interrupt line for
>  > >> aer pme etc. Search  > >>>>> the interrupt  > number in the fdt
>  file.
>  > >>  > >>>>>
>  > >>  > >>>>>  My understanding is that AER interrupt signaling can be
>  > >> done  > >>>>> via INTx,  MSI, or MSI-X (PCIe spec r3.0, sec
>  6.2.4.1.2).
>  > >>  > >>>>> Apparently your device  doesn't support MSI or MSI-X.  Are
>  > >> you  > >>>>> saying it doesn't support INTx  either?  How is the
>  > >> interrupt  you're requesting here different from INTx?
>  > >>  > >>>>
>  > >>  > >>>> Layerscape use none of MSI or MSI-X or INTx to indicate the
>  > >> > >>>> devices or root error in RC mode. But use an independent SPI
>  > >> > >>>> interrupt(arm interrupt controller) line.
>  > >>  > >>>
>  > >>  > >>> The Root Port is a PCI device and should follow the normal
>  > >> PCI  > >>> rules for interrupts.  As far as I understand, that
>  > >> means it  > >>> should use MSI, MSI-X, or INTx.  If your Root Port
>  > >> doesn't use MSI  > >>> or MSI-X, it should use INTx, the
>  > >> PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN register  > >>> should tell us which (INTA/
>  > >> INTB/etc.), and  PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE should work to disable it.
>  > >>  > >>> That's all from the PCI point of view, of course.
>  > >>  > >>
>  > >>  > >> I am faced with the same issue on Keystone PCI hardware and
>  > >> it has  > >> been on my TODO list  for quite some time. Keystone
>  > >> PCI hardware  > >> also doesn't use MSI or MSI-X or INTx for
>  > >> reporting errors received  > >> at the root port, but use a
>  > >> platform interrupt instead (not  > >> complaint to PCI standard as
>  > >> per PCI base spec). So I would need  > >> similar change to have
>  > >> the error interrupt passed to the aer  > >> driver. So there are
>  > >> hardware out there like Keystone which  requires to support this
>  through platform IRQ.
>  > >>  > >
>  > >>  > > This is not a new area of the spec, and it's hard for me to
>  > >> believe  > > that these two new PCIe controllers are both broken
>  > >> the same way  > > (although I guess both are DesignWare-based, so
>  > >> maybe this is the  > > same underlying problem in both cases?).  I
>  > >> think it's more likely  > > that we just haven't figured out the
>  > >> right way to describe this in  the DT.
>  > >>  >
>  > >>  > Keystone is using an older version of the designware IP and it
>  > >> > implements all of the interrupts in the application register
>  > >> space  > unlike other newer version of the hardware. So I assume,
>  > >> the version  > used on Layerscape is also an older version and the
>  > >> both have same  > issue in terms of non standard platform interrupt
>  > >> used for error  reporting.
>  > >>  >
>  > >>  > > I assume you have a Root Port with an AER capability, no MSI
>  > >> > > capability, and no MSI-X capability, right?
>  > >>  >
>  > >>  > Has AER capability and both MSI and INTx (legacy) capability  >
>  > >> > > What does its Interrupt  > > Pin register contain?  If it's
>  > >> zero, it doesn't use INTx either, so  > > according to the spec it
>  > >> should generate no interrupts.
>  > >>  > >
>  > >>  > At address offset 0x3C by default has a value of 1, but it is
>  > >> writable  > by software. So default is INTx A.
>  > >>
>  > >>  0x3c is the Interrupt *Line*, which is read/write.  The Interrupt
>  > >>  *Pin* is at 0x3d and should be read-only.
>  > >>
>  >
>  > You are right. But default is 1 at this address.
>  >
>  > >>  Does your Keystone driver support MSI?  If so, since your Root
>  > >> Port  supports MSI, I would think we would use that by default, and
>  > >> the INTx  stuff wouldn't even matter.
>  > >
>  > > Layerscape is also shows "Both message signaled interrupts (MSI) and
>  legacy INTx are supported."
>  > > But both of them not work for AER interrupt when devices or root
>  port report aer error.
>  > > But another GIC interrupt line do.
>  >
>  > Same with Keystone. Even though both MSI and INTx are supported error
>  > interrupt at root port is reported on a different interrupt line than
>  > MSI/INTx. So for Power Management event interrupt is also different
>  > line.
>  
>  I'm looking at the "Error Message Controls" diagram in the PCIe spec
>  r3.0, sec 6.2.6.  Does this hardware fit into the platform-specific
>  "System Error" case there?  Do the Root Control enable bits (in the PCIe
>  Capability) control this interrupt?  If so, maybe this makes more sense
>  than I thought.

It supposedly not the "System Error" case. But "the Error Interrupt" case.
Which means " Root Error Command register " could control the interrupt
 line we have now. (refer PCIe spec r3.0, sec 6.2.6)

May this kind of hardware design route broken the spec? 

>  
>  We have to assume both notification paths work (the normal INTx/MSI/MSI-
>  X AER interrupts as well as the platform-specific System Errors), so if
>  we add support for System Errors, it should be structured so we prefer
>  INTx/MSI/MSI-X, and only fall back to System Errors if they don't work.
>  AER would have to know which path it's using so aer_enable_rootport()
>  can disable the other one (currently it always disables System Errors).
>  
>  Then you'd have to add quirks to mark MSI/MSI-X/INTx as being broken on
>  your devices to force the fallback to System Errors.
>  
>  How much would this screw up other PCIe services (PME, hotplug, VC, etc)?
>  Does MSI work for them?

PME also like the AER. Hotplug is not supported. Others not known.
Po Liu

>  
>  Bjorn

Powered by blists - more mailing lists