[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <81c84df2-e52b-7713-5026-c3e0a27376bd@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 23:43:05 +0530
From: Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Om Prakash Singh <omp@...dia.com>
CC: <jingoohan1@...il.com>, <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>,
<lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, <amurray@...goodpenguin.co.uk>,
<bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <kishon@...com>, <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
<Jisheng.Zhang@...aptics.com>, <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<kthota@...dia.com>, <mmaddireddy@...dia.com>,
<oop.singh@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: tegra: Disable PTM capabilities for EP mode
On 3/5/2021 5:49 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 01:42:34PM +0530, Om Prakash Singh wrote:
>> PCIe EP compliance expect PTM capabilities (ROOT_CAPABLE, RES_CAPABLE,
>> CLK_GRAN) to be disabled.
>
> I guess this is just enforcing the PCIe spec requirements that only
> Root Ports, RCRBs, and Switches are allowed to set the PTM Responder
> Capable bit, and that the Local Clock Granularity is RsvdP if PTM Root
> Capable is zero? (PCIe r5.0, sec 7.9.16.2)
>
> Should this be done more generally somewhere in the dwc code as
> opposed to in the tegra code?
Agree.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Om Prakash Singh <omp@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++-
>> include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c
>> index 6fa216e..a588312 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c
>> @@ -1639,7 +1639,7 @@ static void pex_ep_event_pex_rst_deassert(struct tegra_pcie_dw *pcie)
>> struct dw_pcie *pci = &pcie->pci;
>> struct dw_pcie_ep *ep = &pci->ep;
>> struct device *dev = pcie->dev;
>> - u32 val;
>> + u32 val, ptm_cap_base = 0;
>
> Unnecessary init.
>
>> int ret;
>>
>> if (pcie->ep_state == EP_STATE_ENABLED)
>> @@ -1760,6 +1760,21 @@ static void pex_ep_event_pex_rst_deassert(struct tegra_pcie_dw *pcie)
>> PCI_CAP_ID_EXP);
>> clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, GEN4_CORE_CLK_FREQ);
>>
>> + /* Disable PTM root and responder capability */
>> + ptm_cap_base = dw_pcie_find_ext_capability(&pcie->pci,
>> + PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PTM);
>> + if (ptm_cap_base) {
>> + dw_pcie_dbi_ro_wr_en(pci);
>> + val = dw_pcie_readl_dbi(pci, ptm_cap_base + PCI_PTM_CAP);
>> + val &= ~PCI_PTM_CAP_ROOT;
>> + dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, ptm_cap_base + PCI_PTM_CAP, val);
>> +
>> + val = dw_pcie_readl_dbi(pci, ptm_cap_base + PCI_PTM_CAP);
>> + val &= ~(PCI_PTM_CAP_RES | PCI_PTM_GRANULARITY_MASK);
Why can't this be clubbed with "val &= ~PCI_PTM_CAP_ROOT;" ?
>> + dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, ptm_cap_base + PCI_PTM_CAP, val);
>> + dw_pcie_dbi_ro_wr_dis(pci);
>> + }
>> +
>> val = (ep->msi_mem_phys & MSIX_ADDR_MATCH_LOW_OFF_MASK);
>> val |= MSIX_ADDR_MATCH_LOW_OFF_EN;
>> dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, MSIX_ADDR_MATCH_LOW_OFF, val);
>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h b/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h
>> index e709ae8..9dd6f8d 100644
>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h
>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h
>> @@ -1050,6 +1050,7 @@
>> /* Precision Time Measurement */
>> #define PCI_PTM_CAP 0x04 /* PTM Capability */
>> #define PCI_PTM_CAP_REQ 0x00000001 /* Requester capable */
>> +#define PCI_PTM_CAP_RES 0x00000002 /* Responder capable */
>> #define PCI_PTM_CAP_ROOT 0x00000004 /* Root capable */
>> #define PCI_PTM_GRANULARITY_MASK 0x0000FF00 /* Clock granularity */
>> #define PCI_PTM_CTRL 0x08 /* PTM Control */
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists