| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <fd164d1f-cf99-fe81-c368-46e3a3742a59@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 14:26:08 +0530
From: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
CC: <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<jonathanh@...dia.com>, <kishon@...com>, <catalin.marinas@....com>,
<will.deacon@....com>, <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
<gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>, <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <kthota@...dia.com>,
<mmaddireddy@...dia.com>, <sagar.tv@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 04/15] PCI: dwc: Move config space capability search
API
On 5/22/2019 2:47 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 06:08:35PM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote:
>> Move PCIe config space capability search API to common DesignWare file
>> as this can be used by both host and ep mode codes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>
>> Acked-by: Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>
>> ---
>> Changes since [v6]:
>> * Exported dw_pcie_find_capability() API
>>
>> Changes since [v5]:
>> * None
>>
>> Changes since [v4]:
>> * Removed redundant APIs in pcie-designware-ep.c file after moving them
>> to pcie-designware.c file based on Bjorn's comments.
>>
>> Changes since [v3]:
>> * Rebased to linux-next top of the tree
>>
>> Changes since [v2]:
>> * None
>>
>> Changes since [v1]:
>> * Removed dw_pcie_find_next_ext_capability() API from here and made a
>> separate patch for that
>>
>> .../pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c | 37 +----------------
>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++
>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h | 2 +
>> 3 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>> index 2bf5a35c0570..65f479250087 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
>> @@ -40,39 +40,6 @@ void dw_pcie_ep_reset_bar(struct dw_pcie *pci, enum pci_barno bar)
>> __dw_pcie_ep_reset_bar(pci, bar, 0);
>> }
>>
>> -static u8 __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap_ptr,
>> - u8 cap)
>> -{
>> - u8 cap_id, next_cap_ptr;
>> - u16 reg;
>> -
>> - if (!cap_ptr)
>> - return 0;
>> -
>> - reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, cap_ptr);
>> - cap_id = (reg & 0x00ff);
>> -
>> - if (cap_id > PCI_CAP_ID_MAX)
>> - return 0;
>> -
>> - if (cap_id == cap)
>> - return cap_ptr;
>> -
>> - next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0xff00) >> 8;
>> - return __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static u8 dw_pcie_ep_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap)
>> -{
>> - u8 next_cap_ptr;
>> - u16 reg;
>> -
>> - reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, PCI_CAPABILITY_LIST);
>> - next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0x00ff);
>> -
>> - return __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
>> -}
>> -
>> static int dw_pcie_ep_write_header(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no,
>> struct pci_epf_header *hdr)
>> {
>> @@ -612,9 +579,9 @@ int dw_pcie_ep_init(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep)
>> dev_err(dev, "Failed to reserve memory for MSI/MSI-X\n");
>> return -ENOMEM;
>> }
>> - ep->msi_cap = dw_pcie_ep_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_MSI);
>> + ep->msi_cap = dw_pcie_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_MSI);
>>
>> - ep->msix_cap = dw_pcie_ep_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX);
>> + ep->msix_cap = dw_pcie_find_capability(pci, PCI_CAP_ID_MSIX);
>>
>> offset = dw_pcie_ep_find_ext_capability(pci, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_REBAR);
>> if (offset) {
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
>> index 83cdd2ce2486..8f53ce63d17e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
>> @@ -14,6 +14,46 @@
>>
>> #include "pcie-designware.h"
>>
>> +/*
>> + * These APIs are different from standard pci_find_*capability() APIs in the
>> + * sense that former can only be used post device enumeration as they require
>> + * 'struct pci_dev *' pointer whereas these APIs require 'struct dw_pcie *'
>> + * pointer and can be used before link up also.
>
> I think this comment is slightly misleading because it suggests the
> reason we need these DW interfaces is because we're doing something
> before a pci_dev pointer is available.
>
> But these DW interfaces are used on devices that will *never* have a
> pci_dev pointer because they are not PCI devices. They're used on
> host controller devices, which have a PCIe link on the downstream
> side, but the host controller driver operates them using their
> upstream, non-PCI interfaces. Logically, I think they would be
> considered parts of Root Complexes, not Root Ports.
>
> There's actually no reason why that upstream interface should look
> anything like PCI; it doesn't need to organize registers into
> capability lists at all. It might be convenient for the hardware to
> do that and share things with a Root Port device, which *is* a PCI
> device, but it's not required.
>
> It also really has nothing to do with whether the link is up. This
> code operates on hardware that is upstream from the link, so we can
> reach it regardless of the link.
I added this comment after receiving a review comment to justify why standard
pci_find_*capability() APIs can't be used here. Hence added this.
I understand your comment that DW interface need not have to be a PCI device,
but what is present in the hardware is effectively a root port implementation
and post enumeration, we get a 'struct pci_dev' created for it, hence I thought
it is fine to bring 'struct pci_dev' into picture.
Also, I agree that mention of 'link up' is unwarranted and could be reworded in
a better way.
Do you suggest to remove this comment altogether or reword it
s/and can be used before link up also/and can be used before 'struct pci_dev' is
available/ ?
>
>> + */
>> +static u8 __dw_pcie_find_next_cap(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap_ptr,
>> + u8 cap)
>> +{
>> + u8 cap_id, next_cap_ptr;
>> + u16 reg;
>> +
>> + if (!cap_ptr)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, cap_ptr);
>> + cap_id = (reg & 0x00ff);
>> +
>> + if (cap_id > PCI_CAP_ID_MAX)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + if (cap_id == cap)
>> + return cap_ptr;
>> +
>> + next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0xff00) >> 8;
>> + return __dw_pcie_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
>> +}
>> +
>> +u8 dw_pcie_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap)
>> +{
>> + u8 next_cap_ptr;
>> + u16 reg;
>> +
>> + reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, PCI_CAPABILITY_LIST);
>> + next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0x00ff);
>> +
>> + return __dw_pcie_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dw_pcie_find_capability);
>> +
>> int dw_pcie_read(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 *val)
>> {
>> if (!IS_ALIGNED((uintptr_t)addr, size)) {
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
>> index 14762e262758..6cb978132469 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h
>> @@ -251,6 +251,8 @@ struct dw_pcie {
>> #define to_dw_pcie_from_ep(endpoint) \
>> container_of((endpoint), struct dw_pcie, ep)
>>
>> +u8 dw_pcie_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 cap);
>> +
>> int dw_pcie_read(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 *val);
>> int dw_pcie_write(void __iomem *addr, int size, u32 val);
>>
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists