[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220211162317.GC448@lpieralisi>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 16:23:17 +0000
From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
To: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Cc: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>,
Roman Bacik <roman.bacik@...adcom.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: iproc: Set all 24 bits of PCI class code
On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 07:13:06PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> Hello!
>
> On Wednesday 05 January 2022 09:51:48 Ray Jui wrote:
> > Hi Pali,
> >
> > On 1/5/2022 1:35 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > Register 0x43c in its low 24 bits contains PCI class code.
> > >
> > > Update code to set all 24 bits of PCI class code and not only upper 16 bits
> > > of PCI class code.
> > >
> > > Use a new macro PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL which represents whole 24 bits
> > > of normal PCI bridge class.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
> > >
> > > ---
> > > Roman helped me with this change and confirmed that class code is stored
> > > really in bits [23:0] of custom register 0x43c (normally class code is
> > > stored in bits [31:8] of pci register 0x08).
> > >
> > > This patch depends on patch which adds PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL macro:
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20211220145140.31898-1-pali@kernel.org/
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c | 9 ++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
> > > index 3df4ab209253..2519201b0e51 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c
> > > @@ -789,14 +789,13 @@ static int iproc_pcie_check_link(struct iproc_pcie *pcie)
> > > return -EFAULT;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - /* force class to PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI (0x0604) */
> > > + /* force class to PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL (0x060400) */
> > > #define PCI_BRIDGE_CTRL_REG_OFFSET 0x43c
> > > -#define PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_MASK 0xffff00
> > > -#define PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_SHIFT 8
> > > +#define PCI_BRIDGE_CTRL_REG_CLASS_MASK 0xffffff
> > > iproc_pci_raw_config_read32(pcie, 0, PCI_BRIDGE_CTRL_REG_OFFSET,
> > > 4, &class);
> > > - class &= ~PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_MASK;
> > > - class |= (PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI << PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_SHIFT);
> > > + class &= ~PCI_BRIDGE_CTRL_REG_CLASS_MASK;
> > > + class |= PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL;
> > > iproc_pci_raw_config_write32(pcie, 0, PCI_BRIDGE_CTRL_REG_OFFSET,
> > > 4, class);
> > >
> >
> > I have two comments:
> >
> > 1. You do not seem to generate the email list using the
> > get_maintainer.pl script, so the two maintainers for Broadcom ARM
> > architecture (Ray Jui and Scott Branden) are left out.
>
> Ou, sorry for that! I have generated this patch for U-Boot and Linux
> kernel and probably mixed or forgot to include correct recipients for
> correct project.
>
> > 2. I suppose 'PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL' is defined in some common PCI
> > header in a separate patch as described in the commit message. Then how
> > come these patches are not constructed with a patch series?
>
> Yes, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL is a new constant for common pci header
> file defined in patch linked in commit message.
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20211220145140.31898-1-pali@kernel.org/
>
> Originally I included this change in v1 of linked patch in December but
> I realized that it does not match standard PCI config space (different
> offset 0x43c vs 0x08 and also different shift 0x8 vs 0x0) and probably
> there is something either incorrect or really non-standard. So later in
> December I dropped iproc_pcie_check_link() change in v2 of the linked
> patch where is introduced PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_PCI_NORMAL and now sent new
> change for iproc_pcie_check_link() separately.
>
> Technically, linked patch in commit message is just extracting code into
> the common macros without any functional changed. But change in this
> iproc_pcie_check_link() has also functional change as now also lower 8
> bits of class code are changed. So in my opinion this patch should be
> really separate of linked patch.
>
> I hope that Lorenzo and Bjorn take patches in correct order...
Can you resend the patches in a series please, I will drop this one.
Thanks,
Lorenzo
> > Other than, the change itself is exactly what I sent to Roman and looks
> > good to me. Thanks.
> >
> > Acked-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
>
> Perfect!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists