lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pci: Add drop mask property for MSI and IOMMU
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 08:22:21AM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> On 17-07-07 07:55 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
> >On 07/07/17 14:30, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >>On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:39:58PM +0530, Srinath Mannam wrote:
> >>>+Example (6)
> >>>+===========
> >>>+
> >>>+/ {
> >>>+ #address-cells = <1>;
> >>>+ #size-cells = <1>;
> >>>+
> >>>+ msi: msi-controller@a {
> >>>+ reg = <0xa 0x1>;
> >>>+ compatible = "vendor,some-controller";
> >>>+ msi-controller;
> >>>+ #msi-cells = <1>;
> >>>+ };
> >>>+
> >>>+ pci: pci@f {
> >>>+ reg = <0xf 0x1>;
> >>>+ compatible = "vendor,pcie-root-complex";
> >>>+ device_type = "pci";
> >>>+
> >>>+ /*
> >>>+ * The sideband data provided to the MSI controller is
> >>>+ * a 10bit data derived from the RID by dropping
> >>>+ * 4 MSBs of device number and 2 MSBs of function number.
> >>>+ */
> >>>+ msi-map = <0x0 &msi_a 0x0 0x100>,
> >>>+ msi-map-drop-mask = <0xff09>
> >>>+ };
> >>>+};
> >>... likewise on all counts.
> >>
> >>Your mapping can be expressed today using a number of msi-map entries,
> >>which you can easily generate programmatically with a trivial perl
> >>script, without requiring a new binding or any new kernel code.
> >>
> >>Please do that instead.
> >
> >Indeed. The systems I'm aware of which need to express non-trivial RID
> >to SID mappings tend to have the bootloader probe PCI and dynamically
> >generate map entries per discovered RID, but even if you wanted to
> >statically generate the whole lot for the worst-case bus range that's
> >still only 512 entries, which is not unmanageable. Notably, it's also
> >what would have to be done (in equivalent) for IORT, although I assume
> >this is an embedded platform for which nobody cares about ACPI.
>
> Actually we will care about ACPI and need to add it (doesn't need to
> be in this patchet unless easy to do so...)

Similarly to what I said for the DT case, with IORT you can solve this
today by using multiple ID mapping entries in a node's ID mappings
array.

I don't imagine the sort of change you are proposing will sail into the
IORT spec.

Thanks,
Mark.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-07 17:49    [W:0.053 / U:8.920 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site