Message-ID: <CAMuHMdWj5rmrP941DF7bsUXbiiemE-o2=8XqnAS-chgmpFFPQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 May 2022 15:08:46 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>
Cc:     "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
        "open list:IA64 (Itanium) PLATFORM" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:SUPERH" <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        "open list:SPARC + UltraSPARC (sparc/sparc64)" 
        <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:RISC-V ARCHITECTURE" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        linux-pci <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "open list:M68K ARCHITECTURE" <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "moderated list:ARM PORT" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
        "open list:PARISC ARCHITECTURE" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        "open list:ALPHA PORT" <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "open list:LINUX FOR POWERPC (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" 
        <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 01/39] Kconfig: introduce HAS_IOPORT option and select it
 as necessary

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:56 PM David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com> wrote:
> From: Maciej W. Rozycki
> > Sent: 06 May 2022 13:27
> > On Fri, 6 May 2022, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > >  If this is PCI/PCIe indeed, then an I/O access is just a different bit
> > > > pattern put on the bus/in the TLP in the address phase.  So what is there
> > > > inherent to the s390 architecture that prevents that different bit pattern
> > > > from being used?
> > >
> > > The hardware design for PCI on s390 is very different from any other
> > > architecture, and more abstract. Rather than implementing MMIO register
> > > access as pointer dereference, this is a separate CPU instruction that
> > > takes a device/bar plus offset as arguments rather than a pointer, and
> > > Linux encodes this back into a fake __iomem token.
> >
> >  OK, that seems to me like a reasonable and quite a clean design (on the
> > hardware side).
> >
> >  So what happens if the instruction is given an I/O rather than memory BAR
> > as the relevant argument?  Is the address space indicator bit (bit #0)
> > simply ignored or what?
>
> You don't understand something...
>
> For a memory BAR pci_ioremap() returns a token that can be used with readl().
> On most architectures readl() is just a memory access.
> This all fails on an I/O BAR.
>
> For an I/O BAR you want a similar pair of functions.
> On x86 the access function would need to use the 'in/out' instructions but
> there is no requirement for the token to be the native io port number.
> On many non-x86 architectures the access function would be a simple memory
> access - but a specific system (eg many ppc) may never actually allow
> such mappings to succeed.
>
> You might also want a third PCI mapping function that can map a memory
> BAR or an I/O BAR - with a suitable access function.
> On x86 this would need something like ioread8() for accesses.
> Except that function uses small integers for io port numbers
> (which is inherently dangerous).
>
> Nothing except the architecture specific implementation of the function
> to access an io BAR would ever go near a function called inb().
>
> The same is really true for other bus type - including ISA and EISA.
> (Ignoring the horrid of probing ISI bus devices - hopefully they
> are in the ACPI tables??_
> If a driver is probed on a ISA bus there ought to be functions
> equivalent to pci_ioremap() (for both memory and IO addresses)
> that return tokens appropriate for the specific bus.
>
> That is all a different load of churn.

A loooong time ago,  it was suggested to add register accessor
functions to struct device, so e.g. readl(dev, offset) would call
into these accessors, which would implement the bus-specific behavior.
No more worries about readl(), __raw_readl(), ioread32b(), or whatever
quirk is needed, at the (small on nowadays' machines) expense of
some indirection...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

Powered by blists - more mailing lists