Re: [PATCH v5 20/20] PCI: dwc: Add Baikal-T1 PCIe controller support
From: Serge Semin
Date: Wed Sep 28 2022 - 06:36:48 EST
On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 11:08:18PM +0000, William McVicker wrote:
> On 09/26/2022, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 04:31:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2022 at 03:49:24PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > @Christoph, @Marek, @Bjorn, @Rob could you please join to the
> > > > DMA-mask related discussion. @Lorenzo can't decide which driver should
> > > > initialize the device DMA-mask.
> > >
> >
> > > The driver that does the actual DMA mapping or allocation functions
> > > need to set it. But even with your comments on the questions I'm
> > > still confused what struct device you are even talking about. Can
> > > you explain this a bit better?
> >
> > We are talking about the DW PCIe Root Port controller with DW eDMA engine
> > embedded. It' simplified structure can be represented as follows:
> >
> > +---------------+ +--------+
> > | System memory | | CPU(s) |
> > +---------------+ +--------+
> > ^ | | ^
> > | ... System bus ... |
> > ... | | ...
> > | v v |
> > +------------+------+--------+----------+------+
> > | DW PCIe RP | AXI-m| | AXI-s/DBI| |
> > | +------+ +----------+ |
> > | ^ ^ | |
> > | +------+----+ | CSRs |
> > | v v v |
> > | +-------+ +---------+ +----------+ |
> > | | eDMA | | in-iATU | | out-iATU | |
> > | +-------+ +---------+ +----------+ |
> > | ^ ^ ^ |
> > | +--------+--+---+-------+ |
> > +------------------| PIPE |--------------------+
> > +------+
> > | ^
> > v |
> > PCIe bus
> >
> > The DW PCIe controller device is instantiated as a platform device
> > defined in the system DT source file. The device is probed by the
> > DW PCIe low-level driver, which after the platform-specific setups
> > initiates the generic DW PCIe host-controller registration. On the way
> > of that procedure the DW PCIe core tries to auto-detect the DW eDMA
> > engine availability. If the engine is found, the DW eDMA probe method
> > is called in order to register the DMA-engine device. After that the
> > PCIe host bridge is registered. Both the PCIe host-bridge and
> > DMA-engine devices will have the DW PCIe platform device as parent.
> >
> > Getting back to the sketch above. Here is a short description of the
> > content:
> > 1. DW eDMA is capable of performing the data transfers from/to System
> > memory to/from PCIe bus memory.
> > 2. in-iATU is the Inbound Address Translation Unit, which is
> > responsible for the PCIe bus peripheral devices to access the system
> > memory. The "dma-ranges" DT-property is used to initialize the
> > PCIe<->Sys memory mapping. (@William note the In-iATU setup doesn't
> > affect the eDMA transfers.)
> > 3. out-iATU is responsible for the CPU(s) to access the PCIe bus
> > peripheral devices memory/cfg-space.
> >
> > So eDMA and in-iATU are using the same AXI-master interface to access
> > the system memory. Thus the DMAable memory capability is the same for
> > both of them (Though in-iATU may have some specific mapping based on
> > the "dma-ranges" DT-property setup). Neither DW eDMA nor DW PCIe Root
> > Port CSRs region have any register to auto-detect the AXI-m interface
> > address bus width. It's selected during the IP-core synthesize and is
> > platform-specific. The question is: "What driver/code is supposed to
> > set the DMA-mask of the DW PCIe platform device?" Seeing the parental
> > platform device is used to perform the memory-mapping for both DW eDMA
> > clients and PCIe-bus peripheral device drivers, and seeing the AXI-m
> > interface parameters aren't auto-detectable and are platform-specific,
> > the only place it should be done in is the DW PCIe low-level device
> > driver. I don't really see any alternative... What is your opinion?
> >
> > -Sergey
>
> I believe this eDMA implementation is new for an upstream DW PCIe device
> driver, right? If so, this will require some refactoring of the DMA mask code,
> but you need to also make sure you don't break the MSI target address use case
> that prompted this 32-bit DMA mask change -- [1].
As far as I can see the commit
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20201117165312.25847-1-vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx/
isn't marked as fixes or whatever. If so it gets to be pointless due to this
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/of/platform.c#L183
and this
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/base/platform.c#L529
and seeing none of the DW PCIe RP/EP platform drivers change the
device DMA-mask of the being probed platform device. So the mask must
have been of 32-bits anyway even without that commit.
Moreover as Rob already told you here
https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAL_JsqJh=d-B51b6yPBRq0tOwbChN=AFPr-a19U1QdQZAE7c1A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
and I mentioned in my response here
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20220912000211.ct6asuhhmnatje5e@mobilestation/
DW PCie MSI TLPs never reach the system memory. The TLP PCIe-bus target
address is checked in the host bridge. If it matches to the one
initialized in the iMSI-RX engine CSRs the MSI IRQ will be raised.
None system memory IO will be actually performed. Thus changing the
device DMA-capability due to something which actually doesn't cause
any DMA at the very least inappropriate.
The last but not least changing the DMA-mask in the common code which
isn't aware of the device/platform capability is also at the very least
inappropriate.
> My changes were directly
> related to allowing the DW PCIe device driver to fallback to a 64-bit DMA mask
> for the MSI target address if there are no 32-bit allocations available. For
> that use-case, using a 32-bit mask doesn't have any perf impact here since
> there is no actual DMAs happening.
Regarding your changes. I'll give you my comments in that thread, but
here is a short summary. One more time. There is no actually DMA
performed on MSI due to the way the iMSI-RX works. So setting the
device DMA-mask based on that is inappropriate. Secondly the coherent
memory might be very expensive on some platforms
(see Documentation/core-api/dma-api.rst). And it's on MIPS32 for
instance. Thus using dma_alloc_coherent()
for something other than for real DMA is also inappropriate. What
should have been done instead:
1. Drop any dma_set_mask*() invocations.
1. Preserve the alloc_page() method usage.
2. Pass GFP_DMA32 to the alloc_page() function only if
PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT is set.
The suggestion above is the best choice seeing we can't reserve some
part of the PCI-bus memory without allocating the real system memory
behind as @Robin noted here in the last paragraph:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/1e63a581-14ae-b4b5-a5bf-ca8f09c33af6@xxxxxxx/
-Sergey
>
> Would it be possible for the DW PCIe device driver to set a capabilities flag
> that the PCIe host controller can read and set the mask accordingly. This way
> you don't need to go fix up any drivers that require a 32-bit DMA'able address
> for the MSI target address. For example, I see several of the PCI capability
> features have 64-bit flags, e.g. PCI_MSI_FLAGS_64BIT and PCI_X_STATUS_64BIT. If
> not, then you're going to have to re-work the host controller driver and DW
> PCIe device drivers that require a 32-bit MSI target address.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20201117165312.25847-1-vidyas@xxxxxxxxxx/
>
> Thanks,
> Will
>