| 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: <42297b99-5930-e270-45d6-181e1c36681f@quicinc.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:08:09 +0530
From: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <quic_krichai@...cinc.com>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
CC: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
Krishna Chaitanya Chundru
<krishna.chundru@....qualcomm.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
"Krzysztof
Kozlowski" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"Bjorn
Helgaas" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
"Manivannan Sadhasivam" <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Wilczyński
<kw@...ux.com>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<quic_mrana@...cinc.com>, <quic_vbadigan@...cinc.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] PCI: of: Add API to retrieve equalization presets
from device tree
On 12/30/2024 7:11 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 24.12.2024 11:57 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 at 12:36, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru
>> <quic_krichai@...cinc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/24/2024 3:25 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2024 at 02:47:00PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/24/2024 12:00 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 10:13:29PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/23/2024 8:56 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 08:02:23PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12/23/2024 5:17 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2024 at 12:21:15PM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> PCIe equalization presets are predefined settings used to optimize
>>>>>>>>>>> signal integrity by compensating for signal loss and distortion in
>>>>>>>>>>> high-speed data transmission.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As per PCIe spec 6.0.1 revision section 8.3.3.3 & 4.2.4 for data rates
>>>>>>>>>>> of 8.0 GT/s, 16.0 GT/s, 32.0 GT/s, and 64.0 GT/s, there is a way to
>>>>>>>>>>> configure lane equalization presets for each lane to enhance the PCIe
>>>>>>>>>>> link reliability. Each preset value represents a different combination
>>>>>>>>>>> of pre-shoot and de-emphasis values. For each data rate, different
>>>>>>>>>>> registers are defined: for 8.0 GT/s, registers are defined in section
>>>>>>>>>>> 7.7.3.4; for 16.0 GT/s, in section 7.7.5.9, etc. The 8.0 GT/s rate has
>>>>>>>>>>> an extra receiver preset hint, requiring 16 bits per lane, while the
>>>>>>>>>>> remaining data rates use 8 bits per lane.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Based on the number of lanes and the supported data rate, this function
>>>>>>>>>>> reads the device tree property and stores in the presets structure.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <krishna.chundru@....qualcomm.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>> drivers/pci/of.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>>> drivers/pci/pci.h | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>>>>>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/of.c b/drivers/pci/of.c
>>>>>>>>>>> index dacea3fc5128..99e0e7ae12e9 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/of.c
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/of.c
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -826,3 +826,48 @@ u32 of_pci_get_slot_power_limit(struct device_node *node,
>>>>>>>>>>> return slot_power_limit_mw;
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_pci_get_slot_power_limit);
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> kerneldoc? Define who should free the memory and how.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I will update this in next series.
>>>>>>>>> as we are allocating using devm_kzalloc it should be freed on driver
>>>>>>>>> detach, as no special freeing is required.
>>>>>>>>>>> +int of_pci_get_equalization_presets(struct device *dev,
>>>>>>>>>>> + struct pci_eq_presets *presets,
>>>>>>>>>>> + int num_lanes)
>>>>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>>>>> + char name[20];
>>>>>>>>>>> + void **preset;
>>>>>>>>>>> + void *temp;
>>>>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (of_property_present(dev->of_node, "eq-presets-8gts")) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + presets->eq_presets_8gts = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(u16) * num_lanes, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (!presets->eq_presets_8gts)
>>>>>>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + ret = of_property_read_u16_array(dev->of_node, "eq-presets-8gts",
>>>>>>>>>>> + presets->eq_presets_8gts, num_lanes);
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Error reading eq-presets-8gts %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + for (int i = 1; i < sizeof(struct pci_eq_presets) / sizeof(void *); i++) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "eq-presets-%dgts", 8 << i);
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (of_property_present(dev->of_node, name)) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + temp = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(u8) * num_lanes, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (!temp)
>>>>>>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + ret = of_property_read_u8_array(dev->of_node, name,
>>>>>>>>>>> + temp, num_lanes);
>>>>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "Error %s %d\n", name, ret);
>>>>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + preset = (void **)((u8 *)presets + i * sizeof(void *));
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ugh.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was trying iterate over each element on the structure as presets holds the
>>>>>>>>> starting address of the structure and to that we are adding size of the void
>>>>>>>>> * point to go to each element. I did this way to reduce the
>>>>>>>>> redundant code to read all the gts which has same way of storing the data
>>>>>>>>> from the device tree. I will add comments here in the next series.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please rewrite this in a cleaner way. The code shouldn't raise
>>>>>>>> questions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> + *preset = temp;
>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_pci_get_equalization_presets);
>>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.h b/drivers/pci/pci.h
>>>>>>>>>>> index 14d00ce45bfa..82362d58bedc 100644
>>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.h
>>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.h
>>>>>>>>>>> @@ -731,7 +731,12 @@ static inline u64 pci_rebar_size_to_bytes(int size)
>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>> struct device_node;
>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>> +struct pci_eq_presets {
>>>>>>>>>>> + void *eq_presets_8gts;
>>>>>>>>>>> + void *eq_presets_16gts;
>>>>>>>>>>> + void *eq_presets_32gts;
>>>>>>>>>>> + void *eq_presets_64gts;
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Why are all of those void*? 8gts is u16*, all other are u8*.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To have common parsing logic I moved them to void*, as these are pointers
>>>>>>>>> actual memory is allocated by of_pci_get_equalization_presets()
>>>>>>>>> based upon the gts these should not give any issues.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please, don't. They have types. void pointers are for the opaque data.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ok.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think then better to use v1 patch
>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241116-presets-v1-2-878a837a4fee@quicinc.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> konrad, any objection on using v1 as that will be cleaner way even if we
>>>>>>> have some repetitive code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Konrad had a nice suggestion about using the array of values. Please use
>>>>>> such an array for 16gts and above. This removes most of repetitive code.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I don't feel having array in the preset structure looks good, I have
>>>>> come up with this logic if you feel it is not so good I will go to the
>>>>> suggested way by having array for 16gts and above.
>>>>>
>>>>> if (of_property_present(dev->of_node, "eq-presets-8gts")) {
>>>>> presets->eq_presets_8gts = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(u16) *
>>>>> num_lanes, GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> if (!presets->eq_presets_8gts)
>>>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = of_property_read_u16_array(dev->of_node,
>>>>> "eq-presets-8gts",
>>>>>
>>>>> presets->eq_presets_8gts, num_lanes);
>>>>> if (ret) {
>>>>> dev_err(dev, "Error reading eq-presets-8gts %d\n",
>>>>> ret);
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> for (int i = EQ_PRESET_TYPE_16GTS; i < EQ_PRESET_TYPE_64GTS; i++) {
>>>>> snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "eq-presets-%dgts", 8 << i);
>>>>> if (of_property_present(dev->of_node, name)) {
>>>>> temp = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(u8) * num_lanes,
>>>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>> if (!temp)
>>>>> return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = of_property_read_u8_array(dev->of_node, name,
>>>>> temp, num_lanes);
>>>>> if (ret) {
>>>>> dev_err(dev, "Error %s %d\n", name, ret);
>>>>> return ret;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> switch (i) {
>>>>> case EQ_PRESET_TYPE_16GTS:
>>>>> presets->eq_presets_16gts = temp;
>>>>> break;
>>>>> case EQ_PRESET_TYPE_32GTS:
>>>>> presets->eq_presets_32gts = temp;
>>>>> break;
>>>>> case EQ_PRESET_TYPE_64GTS:
>>>>> presets->eq_presets_64gts = temp;
>>>>> break;
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> This looks like 'presets->eq_presets[i] = temp;', but I won't insist on
>>>> that.
>>>>
>>>> Also, a strange thought came to my mind: we know that there won't be
>>>> more than 16 lanes. Can we have the following structure instead:
>>>>
>>>> #define MAX_LANES 16
>>>> enum pcie_gts {
>>>> PCIE_GTS_16GTS,
>>>> PCIE_GTS_32GTS,
>>>> PCIE_GTS_64GTS,
>>>> PCIE_GTS_MAX,
>>>> };
>>>> struct pci_eq_presets {
>>>> u16 eq_presets_8gts[MAX_LANES];
>>>> u8 eq_presets_Ngts[PCIE_GTS_MAX][MAX_LANES];
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> This should allow you to drop the of_property_present() and
>>>> devm_kzalloc(). Just read DT data into a corresponding array.
>>>>
>>> in the dwc driver patch I was using pointers and memory allocation
>>> to known if the property is present or not. If I use this way I might
>>> end up reading dt property again.
>>
>> Add foo_valid flags to the struct.
>
> Some(u8)/None would be fitting, but we're not there yet :(
>
> Are all 0x00-0xff(ff) values valid for these presets?
>
currently 0xff are reserved not sure in future PCIe spec data rates
can use it or not.
- Krishna Chaitanya.
>>> I think better to switch to have a
>>> array for above 16gts.
>>
>> Whichever way works for you.
>
> Sorta-answering the earlier email, I have no concerns either
>
> Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists