[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <72b9168b-d4d6-4312-32ea-69358df2f2d0@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2023 13:30:16 +0530
From: Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
CC: <treding@...dia.com>, <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
<dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>, <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
<rafael@...nel.org>, <jonathanh@...dia.com>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
<lpieralisi@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<mmaddireddy@...dia.com>, <kw@...ux.com>, <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
<vidyas@...dia.com>, <sanjayc@...dia.com>, <ksitaraman@...dia.com>,
<ishah@...dia.com>, <bbasu@...dia.com>,
Sumit Gupta <sumitg@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 10/10] PCI: tegra194: add interconnect support in
Tegra234
On 30/03/23 00:47, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 11:28:40PM +0530, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>> On 29/03/23 22:29, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 02:44:34PM +0530, Sumit Gupta wrote:
>>>> On 28/03/23 23:23, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>>> +static void tegra_pcie_icc_set(struct tegra_pcie_dw *pcie)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci = &pcie->pci;
>>>>>> + u32 val, speed, width;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + val = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, pcie->pcie_cap_base + PCI_EXP_LNKSTA);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + speed = FIELD_GET(PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS, val);
>>>>>> + width = FIELD_GET(PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_NLW, val);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + val = width * (PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC(pcie_link_speed[speed]) / BITS_PER_BYTE);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (icc_set_bw(pcie->icc_path, MBps_to_icc(val), 0))
>>>>>> + dev_err(pcie->dev, "can't set bw[%u]\n", val);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed - 1]);
>>>>>
>>>>> Array bounds violation; PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS is 0x000f, so possible
>>>>> speed (CLS) values are 0..0xf and "speed - 1" values are -1..0xe.
>>>>>
>>>>> pcie_gen_freq[] is of size 4 (valid indices 0..3).
>>>>>
>>>>> I see that you're just *moving* this code, but might as well fix it.
>>>>>
>>>> Thank you for the review.
>>>> Will include the below change in the same patch. Please let me know if any
>>>> issue.
>>>>
>>>> - clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed - 1]);
>>>> + if (speed && (speed <= ARRAY_SIZE(pcie_gen_freq)))
>>>> + clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed - 1]);
>>>> + else
>>>> + clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[0]);
>>>
>>> I didn't notice that speed is a u32, so -1 is not a possible value.
>>> Also, it's used earlier for PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC(), so you could do
>>> something like this:
>>>
>>> speed = FIELD_GET(PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS, val) - 1;
>>> if (speed >= ARRAY_SIZE(pcie_gen_freq))
>>> speed = 0;
>>>
>>> val = width * (PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC(pcie_link_speed[speed]) /
>>> BITS_PER_BYTE);
>>> ...
>>> clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed]);
>>
>> I tried this change but PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC gives zero when speed value is
>> one. The speed value ranges from "1 to 4" and for value "1",
>> pcie_link_speed[speed] gives '0xff'.
>
> Oh, my fault, sorry! I thought both places indexed the same array,
> but the first is pcie_link_speed[] (where all the possible values
> (0..0xf) are valid indices) and the second is pcie_gen_freq[] (where
> only 0..3 are valid).
>
>> The below change works fine. Please share if its OK to add it in patch.
>>
>> speed = FIELD_GET(PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS, val);
>> if (!speed || speed >= ARRAY_SIZE(pcie_gen_freq))
>> speed = 1;
>>
>> val = width * (PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC(pcie_link_speed[speed]) /
>> BITS_PER_BYTE);
>
> So I don't think you need to clamp "speed" for indexing
> pcie_link_speed[] at all.
>
>> if (icc_set_bw(pcie->icc_path, MBps_to_icc(val), 0))
>> dev_err(pcie->dev, "can't set bw[%u]\n", val);
>>
>> clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed - 1]);
>
> What if you added a 0th entry to pcie_gen_freq[] so you can index it
> directly with the PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS value the same way as
> pcie_link_speed[]? Then you wouldn't need the "- 1" and only have to
> worry about going off the end:
>
> static const unsigned int pcie_gen_freq[] = {
> GEN1_CORE_CLK_FREQ, /* PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS == 0; undefined */
> GEN1_CORE_CLK_FREQ,
> GEN2_CORE_CLK_FREQ,
> GEN3_CORE_CLK_FREQ,
> GEN4_CORE_CLK_FREQ,
> };
>
> speed = FIELD_GET(PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_CLS, val);
>
> val = width * (PCIE_SPEED2MBS_ENC(pcie_link_speed[speed]) /
> BITS_PER_BYTE);
>
> if (speed >= ARRAY_SIZE(pcie_gen_freq))
> speed = 0;
> clk_set_rate(pcie->core_clk, pcie_gen_freq[speed]);
>
> Bjorn
Yes, this is working fine. Will add it in the patch.
Thank you,
Sumit Gupta
Powered by blists - more mailing lists