[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190512174033.znvtaa5yvhpcmnna@flea>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 19:40:33 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>
To: "U.Mutlu" <um@...luit.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com,
u-boot@...ts.denx.de, linux-amarula@...rulasolutions.com,
Jagan Teki <jagan@...rulasolutions.com>,
Pablo Greco <pgreco@...tosproject.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Oliver Schinagl <oliver@...inagl.nl>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
FUKAUMI Naoki <naobsd@...il.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] drivers: ata: ahci_sunxi: Increased SATA/AHCI DMA
TX/RX FIFOs
Hi,
On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 06:08:19PM +0200, U.Mutlu wrote:
> Hi Maxime & Others,
>
> what follows is a somewhat lengthy technical story behind this patch;
> you can just skip it and jump to the end.
>
>
> As can be seen in the ahci_sunxi.c, the port used in this patch
> is this one (32bit):
> #define AHCI_P0DMACR 0x0170
> It's a so called "Vendor Specific Port" according to the SATA/AHCI specs by Intel.
> The data behind it is actually a struct, consisting of 4 fields,
> each 4bits long, plus a 16bits long field that is marked as Reserved
> in secondary literature (see below):
>
> struct AHCI_P0DMACR_t
> {
> unsigned TXTS : 4,
> RXTS : 4,
> TXABL : 4,
> RXABL : 4,
> Res1 : 16;
> };
>
> This struct is just my creation for my own tests as it's not part of the
> driver source. The patch touches only the first 2 fields: TXTS and RXTS.
>
> See this similar product documentation by Texas Instruments for the above struct:
> https://www.ti.com/lit/ug/sprugj8c/sprugj8c.pdf
> TMS320C674x/OMAP-L1x Processor, Serial ATA (SATA) Controller, User's Guide,
> Literature Number: SPRUGJ8C, March 2011,
> Page 68, Chapter 4.33 "Port DMA Control Register (P0DMACR)"
>
> The above TI document describes the two fields as follows:
>
> TXTS:
> Transmit Transaction Size (TX_TRANSACTION_SIZE). This field defines the
> DMA transaction size in
> DWORDs for transmit (system bus read, device write) operation. [...]
>
> RXTS:
> Receive Transaction Size (RX_TRANSACTION_SIZE). This field defines the
> Port DMA transaction size
> in DWORDs for receive (system bus write, device read) operation. [...]
>
>
> So, in my patch the fields TXTS and RXTS are set to 3 each.
> Without the patch, these fields seem to have some random content
> (I'vee seen 5 and 6, 4 and 4, and 0 and 0 on different devices),
> as the previous code doesn't touch these 2 fields (ie. these two fields
> are not within the used old mask of 0xff00; cf. ahci_sunxi.c, function
> ahci_sunxi_start_engine(...)).
>
>
> Some background story in my hunt for obtaining product documentation:
>
> I couldn't find any product documentation for the SATA/AHCI
> in these SoCs by Allwinner Technology (allwinnertech.com),
> unlike with such products from other such companies.
>
> I asked Allwinner, but they just said that the A20 of my SBC
> would (allegedly) no more be actual and that the support for it
> has ended (but this statement somehow cannot be true as the
> A20 SoC is still continued being marketed at their website).
> They instead sent me a bunch of really irrelevant PDFs which have
> nothing to do with SATA/AHCI.
>
> So, the company Allwinner Technology unfortunately was not cooperative
> to provide me information on their SATA/AHCI-implementation in their SoCs :-(
> Even the ports used in the actual ahci_sunxi.c in the linux tree are undocumented;
> it is even commented with "/* This magic is from the original code */"
> and below it many ports are used for which no documentation is available,
> or at least I couldn't find any on the Internet. And the initial programmer
> in 2014 and prior was Daniel Wang (danielwang@...winnertech.com),
> but email to that address bounces.
>
> So, I was forced to research secondary literature from other vendors
> like Texas Instruments (thanks TI !) and Intel, and also studying
> very old source codes in the old Linux repositories (as it differs
> much from the current version) going back to the year 2014, and had
> to do many (blind) experiments until I found this solution.
>
> The above given User's Guide by Texas Instruments (and their such
> documents for their newer such products) helped me much to find the solution.
> It's of course not really the correct documentation for the Allwinner SoCs,
> but still better than nothing.
>
> If I only had the right documentation, then I for sure could try
> to further improve that already achieved result by this patch,
> as with SATA-II upto 300 MiB/s is possible.
>
>
> Yes, I'll resend the patch with some appropriate comments.
That's awesome research and explanation, thanks! :)
Maxime
--
Maxime Ripard, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists