lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 2/2] dwc: PCI: intel: Intel PCIe RC controller driver
From
Date
Hi Andrew Murray,

On 9/11/2019 6:30 PM, Andrew Murray wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 03:46:17PM +0800, Dilip Kota wrote:
>> Hi Andrew Murray,
>>
>> Please find my response inline.
>>
>> On 9/9/2019 4:31 PM, Andrew Murray wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 09, 2019 at 02:51:03PM +0800, Dilip Kota wrote:
>>>> On 9/6/2019 7:20 PM, Andrew Murray wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 06:58:11PM +0800, Dilip Kota wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Andrew Murray,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the review. Please find my response inline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/5/2019 6:45 PM, Andrew Murray wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 06:10:31PM +0800, Dilip Kota wrote:
>>>>>>>> Add support to PCIe RC controller on Intel Universal
>>>>>>>> Gateway SoC. PCIe controller is based of Synopsys
>>>>>>>> Designware pci core.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dilip Kota <eswara.kota@linux.intel.com>
>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> Hi Dilip,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for the patch, initial feedback below:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> changes on v3:
>>>>>>>> Rename PCIe app logic registers with PCIE_APP prefix.
>>>>>>>> PCIE_IOP_CTRL configuration is not required. Remove respective code.
>>>>>>>> Remove wrapper functions for clk enable/disable APIs.
>>>>>>>> Use platform_get_resource_byname() instead of
>>>>>>>> devm_platform_ioremap_resource() to be similar with DWC framework.
>>>>>>>> Rename phy name to "pciephy".
>>>>>>>> Modify debug message in msi_init() callback to be more specific.
>>>>>>>> Remove map_irq() callback.
>>>>>>>> Enable the INTx interrupts at the time of PCIe initialization.
>>>>>>>> Reduce memory fragmentation by using variable "struct dw_pcie pci"
>>>>>>>> instead of allocating memory.
>>>>>>>> Reduce the delay to 100us during enpoint initialization
>>>>>>>> intel_pcie_ep_rst_init().
>>>>>>>> Call dw_pcie_host_deinit() during remove() instead of directly
>>>>>>>> calling PCIe core APIs.
>>>>>>>> Rename "intel,rst-interval" to "reset-assert-ms".
>>>>>>>> Remove unused APP logic Interrupt bit macro definitions.
>>>>>>>> Use dwc framework's dw_pcie_setup_rc() for PCIe host specific
>>>>>>>> configuration instead of redefining the same functionality in
>>>>>>>> the driver.
>>>>>>>> Move the whole DT parsing specific code to intel_pcie_get_resources()
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 13 +
>>>>>>>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile | 1 +
>>>>>>>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-axi.c | 840 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 854 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-axi.c
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
>>>>>>>> index 6ea778ae4877..e44b9b6a6390 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
>>>>>>>> @@ -82,6 +82,19 @@ config PCIE_DW_PLAT_EP
>>>>>>>> order to enable device-specific features PCI_DW_PLAT_EP must be
>>>>>>>> selected.
>>>>>>>> +config PCIE_INTEL_AXI
>>>>>>>> + bool "Intel AHB/AXI PCIe host controller support"
>>>>>>>> + depends on PCI_MSI
>>>>>>>> + depends on PCI
>>>>>>> I don't think the PCI dependency is required here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm also not sure why PCI_MSI is required, we select PCIE_DW_HOST which
>>>>>>> depends on PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN which depends on PCI_MSI.
>>>>>> Agree, dependency on PCI and PCI_MSI can be removed. I will remove it in
>>>>>> next patch revision.
>>>>>>>> + depends on OF
>>>>>>>> + select PCIE_DW_HOST
>>>>>>>> + help
>>>>>>>> + Say 'Y' here to enable support for Intel AHB/AXI PCIe Host
>>>>>>>> + controller driver.
>>>>>>>> + The Intel PCIe controller is based on the Synopsys Designware
>>>>>>>> + pcie core and therefore uses the Designware core functions to
>>>>>>>> + implement the driver.
>>>>>>> I can see this description is similar to others in the same Kconfig,
>>>>>>> however I'm not sure what value a user gains by knowing implementation
>>>>>>> details - it's helpful to know that PCIE_INTEL_AXI is based on the
>>>>>>> Designware core, but is it helpful to know that the Designware core
>>>>>>> functions are used?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> config PCI_EXYNOS
>>>>>>>> bool "Samsung Exynos PCIe controller"
>>>>>>>> depends on SOC_EXYNOS5440 || COMPILE_TEST
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
>>>>>>>> index b085dfd4fab7..46e656ebdf90 100644
>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
>>>>>>>> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DW) += pcie-designware.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DW_HOST) += pcie-designware-host.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DW_EP) += pcie-designware-ep.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_DW_PLAT) += pcie-designware-plat.o
>>>>>>>> +obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_INTEL_AXI) += pcie-intel-axi.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCI_DRA7XX) += pci-dra7xx.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCI_EXYNOS) += pci-exynos.o
>>>>>>>> obj-$(CONFIG_PCI_IMX6) += pci-imx6.o
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-axi.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-axi.c
>>>>>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>>>>>> index 000000000000..75607ce03ebf
>>>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-intel-axi.c
>>>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,840 @@
>>>>>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>>>> + * PCIe host controller driver for Intel AXI PCIe Bridge
>>>>>>>> + *
>>>>>>>> + * Copyright (c) 2019 Intel Corporation.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/clk.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/of_irq.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/of_pci.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/phy/phy.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/reset.h>
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#include "../../pci.h"
>>>>>>> Please remove this - it isn't needed.
>>>>>> Ok, will remove it in next patch revision.
>>>>>>>> +#include "pcie-designware.h"
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_CCRID 0x8
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCAP 0x7C
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCAP_MAX_LINK_SPEED GENMASK(3, 0)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCAP_MAX_LENGTH_WIDTH GENMASK(9, 4)
>>>>>>> These look like the standard PCI Link Capabilities Register,
>>>>>>> can you use the standard ones defined in pci_regs.h? (see
>>>>>>> PCI_EXP_LNKCAP_SLS_*).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* Link Control and Status Register */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS 0x80
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_ASPM_ENABLE GENMASK(1, 0)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_RCB128 BIT(3)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_LINK_DISABLE BIT(4)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_COM_CLK_CFG BIT(6)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_HW_AW_DIS BIT(9)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_LINK_SPEED GENMASK(19, 16)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_NEGOTIATED_LINK_WIDTH GENMASK(25, 20)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS_SLOT_CLK_CFG BIT(28)
>>>>>>> These look like the standard Link Control and Link Status register, can
>>>>>>> you use the standard ones defined in pci_regs.h? (see PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_*
>>>>>>> and PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_*).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2 0xA0
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED GENMASK(3, 0)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_25GT 0x1
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_5GT 0x2
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_8GT 0x3
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_16GT 0x4
>>>>>>> And these look like the standard Link Control Register 2 (see
>>>>>>> PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_*).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Most of the #defines above and below look just like standard PCI defines
>>>>>>> (for example those found in pci_regs.h) - both in terms of their name and
>>>>>>> what they do. Ideally where the functionality is the same or very similar,
>>>>>>> then we should use the standard PCI defines in (pci_regs.h). This helps
>>>>>>> readability/understanding, helps to identify duplicate code and reduces
>>>>>>> the size of your patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also the capability offsets (e.g. PCIE_LCTLSTS2) are also standard. The
>>>>>>> offsets you define are offset by an additional 0x70. E.g.i
>>>>>>> PCIE_LCTLSTS2 = 0xA0, and PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2 = 0x30. Perhaps abstracting
>>>>>>> this offset will allow you to use the standard pci defines?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I haven't looked in much detail at the remainder of the defines, but
>>>>>>> the same rationale should apply.
>>>>>> Agree, that's a good point. I will define the offset macro and use the
>>>>>> macros defined in pci_regs.h.
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS BIT(5)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* Ack Frequency Register */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR 0x70C
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR_FTS_NUM GENMASK(15, 8)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR_COM_FTS_NUM GENMASK(23, 16)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR_GEN12_FTS_NUM_DFT (SZ_128 - 1)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR_GEN3_FTS_NUM_DFT 180
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_AFR_GEN4_FTS_NUM_DFT 196
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_PLCR_DLL_LINK_EN BIT(5)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_PORT_LOGIC_FTS GENMASK(7, 0)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_PORT_LOGIC_DFT_FTS_NUM (SZ_128 - 1)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_MISC_CTRL 0x8BC
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_MISC_CTRL_DBI_RO_WR_EN BIT(0)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_MULTI_LANE_CTRL 0x8C0
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_UPCONFIG_SUPPORT BIT(7)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_DIRECT_LINK_WIDTH_CHANGE BIT(6)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_TARGET_LINK_WIDTH GENMASK(5, 0)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* APP RC Core Control Register */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_CCR 0x10
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_CCR_LTSSM_ENABLE BIT(0)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* PCIe Message Control */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_MSG_CR 0x30
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_MSG_XMT_PM_TURNOFF BIT(0)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* PCIe Power Management Control */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_PMC 0x44
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_PMC_IN_L2 BIT(20)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/* Interrupt Enable Register */
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRNEN 0xF4
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRNCR 0xF8
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_AER_REPORT BIT(0)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_PME BIT(2)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_RX_VDM_MSG BIT(4)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_PM_TO_ACK BIT(9)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_LINK_AUTO_BW_STAT BIT(11)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_BW_MGT BIT(12)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_MSG_LTR BIT(18)
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_SYS_ERR_RC BIT(29)
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_INTX_OFST 12
>>>>>>>> +#define PCIE_APP_IRN_INT (PCIE_APP_IRN_AER_REPORT | PCIE_APP_IRN_PME | \
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_IRN_RX_VDM_MSG | PCIE_APP_IRN_SYS_ERR_RC | \
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_IRN_PM_TO_ACK | PCIE_APP_IRN_MSG_LTR | \
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_IRN_BW_MGT | PCIE_APP_IRN_LINK_AUTO_BW_STAT | \
>>>>>>>> + (PCIE_APP_INTX_OFST + PCI_INTERRUPT_INTA) | \
>>>>>>>> + (PCIE_APP_INTX_OFST + PCI_INTERRUPT_INTB) | \
>>>>>>>> + (PCIE_APP_INTX_OFST + PCI_INTERRUPT_INTC) | \
>>>>>>>> + (PCIE_APP_INTX_OFST + PCI_INTERRUPT_INTD))
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +#define BUS_IATU_OFFS SZ_256M
>>>>>>>> +#define RST_INTRVL_DFT_MS 100
>>>>>>>> +enum {
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_SPEED_AUTO = 0,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN1,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN2,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN3,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN4,
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +struct intel_pcie_soc {
>>>>>>>> + unsigned int pcie_ver;
>>>>>>>> + unsigned int pcie_atu_offset;
>>>>>>>> + u32 num_viewport;
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +struct intel_pcie_port {
>>>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie pci;
>>>>>>>> + unsigned int id; /* Physical RC Index */
>>>>>>>> + void __iomem *app_base;
>>>>>>>> + struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
>>>>>>>> + u32 rst_interval;
>>>>>>>> + u32 max_speed;
>>>>>>>> + u32 link_gen;
>>>>>>>> + u32 max_width;
>>>>>>>> + u32 lanes;
>>>>>>>> + struct clk *core_clk;
>>>>>>>> + struct reset_control *core_rst;
>>>>>>>> + struct phy *phy;
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void pcie_update_bits(void __iomem *base, u32 mask, u32 val, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 orig, tmp;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + orig = readl(base + ofs);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + tmp = (orig & ~mask) | (val & mask);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (tmp != orig)
>>>>>>>> + writel(tmp, base + ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static inline u32 pcie_app_rd(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + return readl(lpp->app_base + ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static inline void pcie_app_wr(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp, u32 val, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + writel(val, lpp->app_base + ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void pcie_app_wr_mask(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp,
>>>>>>>> + u32 mask, u32 val, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_update_bits(lpp->app_base, mask, val, ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static inline u32 pcie_rc_cfg_rd(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + return dw_pcie_readl_dbi(&lpp->pci, ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static inline void pcie_rc_cfg_wr(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp, u32 val, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + dw_pcie_writel_dbi(&lpp->pci, ofs, val);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp,
>>>>>>>> + u32 mask, u32 val, u32 ofs)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_update_bits(lpp->pci.dbi_base, mask, val, ofs);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_mem_iatu(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct pcie_port *pp = &lpp->pci.pp;
>>>>>>>> + phys_addr_t cpu_addr = pp->mem_base;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(&lpp->pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_INDEX0,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_ATU_TYPE_MEM, cpu_addr,
>>>>>>>> + pp->mem_base, pp->mem_size);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_ltssm_enable(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_APP_CCR_LTSSM_ENABLE,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_CCR_LTSSM_ENABLE, PCIE_APP_CCR);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_ltssm_disable(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_APP_CCR_LTSSM_ENABLE, 0, PCIE_APP_CCR);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const char *pcie_link_gen_to_str(int gen)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + switch (gen) {
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN1:
>>>>>>>> + return "2.5";
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN2:
>>>>>>>> + return "5.0";
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN3:
>>>>>>>> + return "8.0";
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN4:
>>>>>>>> + return "16.0";
>>>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>>>> + return "???";
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_link_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 val;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + val = pcie_rc_cfg_rd(lpp, PCIE_LCAP);
>>>>>>>> + lpp->max_speed = FIELD_GET(PCIE_LCAP_MAX_LINK_SPEED, val);
>>>>>>>> + lpp->max_width = FIELD_GET(PCIE_LCAP_MAX_LENGTH_WIDTH, val);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + val = pcie_rc_cfg_rd(lpp, PCIE_LCTLSTS);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + val &= ~(PCIE_LCTLSTS_LINK_DISABLE | PCIE_LCTLSTS_ASPM_ENABLE);
>>>>>>>> + val |= (PCIE_LCTLSTS_SLOT_CLK_CFG | PCIE_LCTLSTS_COM_CLK_CFG |
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LCTLSTS_RCB128);
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr(lpp, val, PCIE_LCTLSTS);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_max_speed_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 reg, val;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + reg = pcie_rc_cfg_rd(lpp, PCIE_LCTLSTS2);
>>>>>>>> + switch (lpp->link_gen) {
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN1:
>>>>>>>> + reg &= ~PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED;
>>>>>>>> + reg |= PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS |
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_25GT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN2:
>>>>>>>> + reg &= ~PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED;
>>>>>>>> + reg |= PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS |
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_5GT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN3:
>>>>>>>> + reg &= ~PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED;
>>>>>>>> + reg |= PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS |
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_8GT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN4:
>>>>>>>> + reg &= ~PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED;
>>>>>>>> + reg |= PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS |
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LCTLSTS2_TGT_LINK_SPEED_16GT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>>>> + /* Use hardware capability */
>>>>>>>> + val = pcie_rc_cfg_rd(lpp, PCIE_LCAP);
>>>>>>>> + val = FIELD_GET(PCIE_LCAP_MAX_LINK_SPEED, val);
>>>>>>>> + reg &= ~PCIE_LCTLSTS2_HW_AUTO_DIS;
>>>>>>>> + reg |= val;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr(lpp, reg, PCIE_LCTLSTS2);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_speed_change_enable(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 mask, val;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + mask = PORT_LOGIC_SPEED_CHANGE | PCIE_PORT_LOGIC_FTS;
>>>>>>>> + val = PORT_LOGIC_SPEED_CHANGE | PCIE_PORT_LOGIC_DFT_FTS_NUM;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, mask, val, PCIE_LINK_WIDTH_SPEED_CONTROL);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_speed_change_disable(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PORT_LOGIC_SPEED_CHANGE, 0,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_LINK_WIDTH_SPEED_CONTROL);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_max_link_width_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 mask, val;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* HW auto bandwidth negotiation must be enabled */
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_LCTLSTS_HW_AW_DIS, 0, PCIE_LCTLSTS);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + mask = PCIE_DIRECT_LINK_WIDTH_CHANGE | PCIE_TARGET_LINK_WIDTH;
>>>>>>>> + val = PCIE_DIRECT_LINK_WIDTH_CHANGE | lpp->lanes;
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, mask, val, PCIE_MULTI_LANE_CTRL);
>>>>>>> Is this identical functionality to the writing of PCIE_PORT_LINK_CONTROL
>>>>>>> in dw_pcie_setup?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ask because if the user sets num-lanes in the DT, will it have the
>>>>>>> desired effect?
>>>>>> intel_pcie_max_link_width_setup() function will be called by sysfs attribute pcie_width_store() to change on the fly.
>>>>> Indeed, but a user may also set num-lanes in the device tree. I'm wondering
>>>>> if, when set in device-tree, it will have the desired effect. Because I don't
>>>>> see anything similar to PCIE_LCTLSTS_HW_AW_DIS in dw_pcie_setup which is what
>>>>> your function does here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess I'm trying to avoid the suitation where num-lanes doesn't have the
>>>>> desired effect and the only way to set the num-lanes is throught the sysfs
>>>>> control.
>>>> I will check this and get back to you.
>> intel_pcie_max_link_width_setup() is doing the lane resizing which is
>> different from the link up/establishment happening during probe. Also
>> PCIE_LCTLSTS_HW_AW_DIS default value is 0 so not setting during the probe or
>> dw_pcie_setup.
>>
>> intel_pcie_max_link_width_setup() is programming as per the designware PCIe
>> controller databook instructions for lane resizing.
>>
>> Below lines are from Designware PCIe databook for lane resizing.
>>
>>  Program the TARGET_LINK_WIDTH[5:0] field of the MULTI_LANE_CONTROL_OFF
>> register.
>>  Program the DIRECT_LINK_WIDTH_CHANGE2 field of the MULTI_LANE_CONTROL_OFF
>> register.
>> It is assumed that the PCIE_CAP_HW_AUTO_WIDTH_DISABLE field in the
>> LINK_CONTROL_LINK_STATUS_REG register is 0.
> OK, so there is a difference between initial training and then resizing
> of the link. Given that this is not Intel specific, should this function
> exist within the designware driver for the benefit of others?
I am ok to add if maintainer agrees with it.
>
>>
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_port_logic_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 val, mask, fts;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + switch (lpp->max_speed) {
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN1:
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN2:
>>>>>>>> + fts = PCIE_AFR_GEN12_FTS_NUM_DFT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN3:
>>>>>>>> + fts = PCIE_AFR_GEN3_FTS_NUM_DFT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + case PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN4:
>>>>>>>> + fts = PCIE_AFR_GEN4_FTS_NUM_DFT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + default:
>>>>>>>> + fts = PCIE_AFR_GEN12_FTS_NUM_DFT;
>>>>>>>> + break;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + mask = PCIE_AFR_FTS_NUM | PCIE_AFR_COM_FTS_NUM;
>>>>>>>> + val = FIELD_PREP(PCIE_AFR_FTS_NUM, fts) |
>>>>>>>> + FIELD_PREP(PCIE_AFR_COM_FTS_NUM, fts);
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, mask, val, PCIE_AFR);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Port Link Control Register */
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_PLCR_DLL_LINK_EN,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_PLCR_DLL_LINK_EN, PCIE_PORT_LINK_CONTROL);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_upconfig_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_UPCONFIG_SUPPORT,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_UPCONFIG_SUPPORT, PCIE_MULTI_LANE_CTRL);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_rc_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_ltssm_disable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_link_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + dw_pcie_setup_rc(&lpp->pci.pp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_upconfig_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_max_speed_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_speed_change_enable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_port_logic_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_mem_iatu(lpp);
>>>>>>> Doesn't dw_pcie_setup_rc do the same as intel_pcie_mem_iatu?
>>>>>> Thanks for pointing it. dw_pcie_setup_rc() does.
>>>>>> intel_pcie_mem_iatu can be removed.
>>>>> Excellent.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_ep_rst_init(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct device *dev = lpp->pci.dev;
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get(dev, "reset", GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(lpp->reset_gpio)) {
>>>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(lpp->reset_gpio);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to request PCIe GPIO: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + /* Make initial reset last for 100us */
>>>>>>>> + usleep_range(100, 200);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_core_rst_assert(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + reset_control_assert(lpp->core_rst);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_core_rst_deassert(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>>>> + * One micro-second delay to make sure the reset pulse
>>>>>>>> + * wide enough so that core reset is clean.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> + udelay(1);
>>>>>>>> + reset_control_deassert(lpp->core_rst);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /*
>>>>>>>> + * Some SoC core reset also reset PHY, more delay needed
>>>>>>>> + * to make sure the reset process is done.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> + usleep_range(1000, 2000);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_device_rst_assert(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(lpp->reset_gpio, 1);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_device_rst_deassert(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + msleep(lpp->rst_interval);
>>>>>>>> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(lpp->reset_gpio, 0);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_app_logic_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_device_rst_deassert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_ltssm_enable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return dw_pcie_wait_for_link(&lpp->pci);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static irqreturn_t intel_pcie_core_isr(int irq, void *arg)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp = arg;
>>>>>>>> + u32 val, reg;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + reg = pcie_app_rd(lpp, PCIE_APP_IRNCR);
>>>>>>>> + val = reg & PCIE_APP_IRN_INT;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr(lpp, val, PCIE_APP_IRNCR);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + trace_printk("PCIe misc interrupt status 0x%x\n", reg);
>>>>>>>> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>> Why do we bother handling this interrupt?
>>>>>> This helps during debugging.
>>>>> I think it should be removed. It adds very little value to most users.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most users won't have access to the datasheets to debug this properly, and
>>>>> in any case if they could, then they would be competent to add an interrupt
>>>>> handler themselves.
>>>> IMO, having this will help to get the basic hardware interrupt status during
>>>> debugging.
>>>> And, user also can enhance the handler as per the need.
>>>> I thing keeping it is beneficial than removing it.
>>>> Please let me know your view.
>>> I'm much prefer to remove this.
>> Sure, i am OK to remove it.
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_setup_irq(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct device *dev = lpp->pci.dev;
>>>>>>>> + struct platform_device *pdev;
>>>>>>>> + char *irq_name;
>>>>>>>> + int irq, ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
>>>>>>>> + irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>>>>>>>> + if (irq < 0) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "missing sys integrated irq resource\n");
>>>>>>>> + return irq;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + irq_name = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, "pcie_misc%d", lpp->id);
>>>>>>>> + if (!irq_name) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to alloc irq name\n");
>>>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = devm_request_irq(dev, irq, intel_pcie_core_isr,
>>>>>>>> + IRQF_SHARED, irq_name, lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "request irq %d failed\n", irq);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + /* Enable integrated interrupts */
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_APP_IRN_INT,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_IRN_INT, PCIE_APP_IRNEN);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_core_irq_disable(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr(lpp, 0, PCIE_APP_IRNEN);
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr(lpp, PCIE_APP_IRN_INT, PCIE_APP_IRNCR);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_get_resources(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp;
>>>>>>>> + struct resource *res;
>>>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci;
>>>>>>>> + struct device *dev;
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>>>>>>> + pci = &lpp->pci;
>>>>>>>> + dev = pci->dev;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "linux,pci-domain", &lpp->id);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get domain id, errno %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "dbi");
>>>>>>>> + if (!res)
>>>>>>>> + return -ENXIO;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + pci->dbi_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(pci->dbi_base))
>>>>>>>> + return PTR_ERR(pci->dbi_base);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->core_clk = devm_clk_get(dev, NULL);
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(lpp->core_clk)) {
>>>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(lpp->core_clk);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get clks: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->core_rst = devm_reset_control_get(dev, NULL);
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(lpp->core_rst)) {
>>>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(lpp->core_rst);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to get resets: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = device_property_match_string(dev, "device_type", "pci");
>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to find pci device type: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (device_property_read_u32(dev, "reset-assert-ms",
>>>>>>>> + &lpp->rst_interval))
>>>>>>>> + lpp->rst_interval = RST_INTRVL_DFT_MS;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (device_property_read_u32(dev, "max-link-speed", &lpp->link_gen))
>>>>>>>> + lpp->link_gen = 0; /* Fallback to auto */
>>>>>>> Is it possible to use of_pci_get_max_link_speed here instead?
>>>>>> Thanks for pointing it. of_pci_get_max_link_speed() can be used here. I will
>>>>>> update it in the next patch revision.
>> I just remember, earlier we were using  of_pci_get_max_link_speed() itself.
>> As per reviewer comments changed to device_property_read_u32() to maintain
>> symmetry in parsing device tree properties from device node.
>> Let me know your view.
> I couldn't find an earlier version of this series that used of_pci_get_max_link_speed,
> have I missed it somewhere?
It happened in our internal review.
What's your suggestion please, either to go with symmetry in parsing
"device_property_read_u32()" or with pci helper function
"of_pci_get_max_link_speed"?
>
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "app");
>>>>>>>> + if (!res)
>>>>>>>> + return -ENXIO;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->app_base = devm_ioremap_resource(dev, res);
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(lpp->app_base))
>>>>>>>> + return PTR_ERR(lpp->app_base);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_ep_rst_init(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>> Given that this is called from a function '..._get_resources' I don't think
>>>>>>> we should be resetting anything here.
>>>>>> Agree. I will move it out of get_resources().
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->phy = devm_phy_get(dev, "pciephy");
>>>>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(lpp->phy)) {
>>>>>>>> + ret = PTR_ERR(lpp->phy);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "couldn't get pcie-phy: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_deinit_phy(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + phy_exit(lpp->phy);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_wait_l2(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 value;
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (lpp->max_speed < PCIE_LINK_SPEED_GEN3)
>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Send PME_TURN_OFF message */
>>>>>>>> + pcie_app_wr_mask(lpp, PCIE_APP_MSG_XMT_PM_TURNOFF,
>>>>>>>> + PCIE_APP_MSG_XMT_PM_TURNOFF, PCIE_APP_MSG_CR);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Read PMC status and wait for falling into L2 link state */
>>>>>>>> + ret = readl_poll_timeout(lpp->app_base + PCIE_APP_PMC, value,
>>>>>>>> + (value & PCIE_APP_PMC_IN_L2), 20,
>>>>>>>> + jiffies_to_usecs(5 * HZ));
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(lpp->pci.dev, "PCIe link enter L2 timeout!\n");
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void intel_pcie_turn_off(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + if (dw_pcie_link_up(&lpp->pci))
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_wait_l2(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* Put EP in reset state */
>>>>>>> EP?
>>>>>> End point device. I will update it.
>>>>> Is this not a host bridge controller?
>>>> It is PERST#, signals hardware reset to the End point .
>>>>         /* Put EP in reset state */
>>>>         intel_pcie_device_rst_assert(lpp);
>>> OK.
>>>
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_device_rst_assert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY, 0, PCI_COMMAND);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_host_setup(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_rst_assert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_device_rst_assert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = phy_init(lpp->phy);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_rst_deassert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(lpp->core_clk);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(lpp->pci.dev, "Core clock enable failed: %d\n", ret);
>>>>>>>> + goto clk_err;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_rc_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_app_logic_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + goto app_init_err;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_setup_irq(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (!ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_turn_off(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +app_init_err:
>>>>>>>> + clk_disable_unprepare(lpp->core_clk);
>>>>>>>> +clk_err:
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_rst_assert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_deinit_phy(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static ssize_t
>>>>>>>> +pcie_link_status_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>>>>>> + char *buf)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + u32 reg, width, gen;
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + reg = pcie_rc_cfg_rd(lpp, PCIE_LCTLSTS);
>>>>>>>> + width = FIELD_GET(PCIE_LCTLSTS_NEGOTIATED_LINK_WIDTH, reg);
>>>>>>>> + gen = FIELD_GET(PCIE_LCTLSTS_LINK_SPEED, reg);
>>>>>>>> + if (gen > lpp->max_speed)
>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return sprintf(buf, "Port %2u Width x%u Speed %s GT/s\n", lpp->id,
>>>>>>>> + width, pcie_link_gen_to_str(gen));
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(pcie_link_status);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static ssize_t pcie_speed_store(struct device *dev,
>>>>>>>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>>>>>> + const char *buf, size_t len)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp;
>>>>>>>> + unsigned long val;
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = kstrtoul(buf, 10, &val);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (val > lpp->max_speed)
>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->link_gen = val;
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_max_speed_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_speed_change_disable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_speed_change_enable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return len;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +static DEVICE_ATTR_WO(pcie_speed);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +/*
>>>>>>>> + * Link width change on the fly is not always successful.
>>>>>>>> + * It also depends on the partner.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> +static ssize_t pcie_width_store(struct device *dev,
>>>>>>>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>>>>>> + const char *buf, size_t len)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp;
>>>>>>>> + unsigned long val;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (kstrtoul(buf, 10, &val))
>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (val > lpp->max_width)
>>>>>>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp->lanes = val;
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_max_link_width_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return len;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +static DEVICE_ATTR_WO(pcie_width);
>>>>>>> You mentioned that a use-case for changing width/speed on the fly was to
>>>>>>> control power consumption (and this also helps debugging issues). As I
>>>>>>> understand there is no current support for this in the kernel - yet it is
>>>>>>> something that would provide value.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I haven't looked in much detail, however as I understand the PCI spec
>>>>>>> allows an upstream partner to change the link speed and retrain. (I'm not
>>>>>>> sure about link width). Given that we already have
>>>>>>> [current,max]_link_[speed,width] is sysfs for each PCI device, it would
>>>>>>> seem natural to extend this to allow for writing a max width or speed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So ideally this type of thing would be moved to the core or at least in
>>>>>>> the dwc driver. This way the benefits can be applied to more devices on
>>>>>>> larger PCI fabrics - Though perhaps others here will have a different view
>>>>>>> and I'm keen to hear them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm keen to limit the differences between the DWC controller drivers and
>>>>>>> unify common code - thus it would be helpful to have a justification as to
>>>>>>> why this is only relevant for this controller.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For user-space only control, it is possible to achieve what you have here
>>>>>>> with userspace utilities (something like setpci) (assuming the standard
>>>>>>> looking registers you currently access are exposed in the normal config
>>>>>>> space way - though PCIe capabilities).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My suggestion would be to drop these changes and later add something that
>>>>>>> can benefit more devices. In any case if these changes stay within this
>>>>>>> driver then it would be helpful to move them to a separate patch.
>>>>>> Sure, i will submit these entity in separate patch.
>>>>> Please ensure that all supporting macros, functions and defines go with that
>>>>> other patch as well please.
>>>> Sure.
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static struct attribute *pcie_cfg_attrs[] = {
>>>>>>>> + &dev_attr_pcie_link_status.attr,
>>>>>>>> + &dev_attr_pcie_speed.attr,
>>>>>>>> + &dev_attr_pcie_width.attr,
>>>>>>>> + NULL,
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +ATTRIBUTE_GROUPS(pcie_cfg);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_sysfs_init(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + return devm_device_add_groups(lpp->pci.dev, pcie_cfg_groups);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static void __intel_pcie_remove(struct intel_pcie_port *lpp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + pcie_rc_cfg_wr_mask(lpp, PCI_COMMAND_MEMORY | PCI_COMMAND_MASTER,
>>>>>>>> + 0, PCI_COMMAND);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_irq_disable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_turn_off(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + clk_disable_unprepare(lpp->core_clk);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_rst_assert(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_deinit_phy(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>>>>>>> + struct pcie_port *pp = &lpp->pci.pp;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + dw_pcie_host_deinit(pp);
>>>>>>>> + __intel_pcie_remove(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int __maybe_unused intel_pcie_suspend_noirq(struct device *dev)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_core_irq_disable(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_wait_l2(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_deinit_phy(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + clk_disable_unprepare(lpp->core_clk);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int __maybe_unused intel_pcie_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + return intel_pcie_host_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_rc_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp = dev_get_drvdata(pci->dev);
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + /* RC/host initialization */
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_host_setup(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>> Insert new line here.
>>>>>> Ok.
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_sysfs_init(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + __intel_pcie_remove(lpp);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +int intel_pcie_msi_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + dev_dbg(pci->dev, "PCIe MSI/MSIx is handled by MSI in x86 processor\n");
>>>>>>> What about other processors? (Noting that this driver doesn't depend on
>>>>>>> any specific ARCH in the KConfig).
>>>>>> Agree. i will mark the dependency in Kconfig.
>>>>> OK, please also see how other drivers use the COMPILE_TEST Kconfig option.
>>>> Ok sure.
>>>>> I'd suggest that the dev_dbg just becomes a code comment.
>> Ok
>>>>>>>> + return 0;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +u64 intel_pcie_cpu_addr(struct dw_pcie *pcie, u64 cpu_addr)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + return cpu_addr + BUS_IATU_OFFS;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const struct dw_pcie_ops intel_pcie_ops = {
>>>>>>>> + .cpu_addr_fixup = intel_pcie_cpu_addr,
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops intel_pcie_dw_ops = {
>>>>>>>> + .host_init = intel_pcie_rc_init,
>>>>>>>> + .msi_host_init = intel_pcie_msi_init,
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const struct intel_pcie_soc pcie_data = {
>>>>>>>> + .pcie_ver = 0x520A,
>>>>>>>> + .pcie_atu_offset = 0xC0000,
>>>>>>>> + .num_viewport = 3,
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static int intel_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + const struct intel_pcie_soc *data;
>>>>>>>> + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>>>>>> + struct intel_pcie_port *lpp;
>>>>>>>> + struct pcie_port *pp;
>>>>>>>> + struct dw_pcie *pci;
>>>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + lpp = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*lpp), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>>>> + if (!lpp)
>>>>>>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, lpp);
>>>>>>>> + pci = &lpp->pci;
>>>>>>>> + pci->dev = dev;
>>>>>>>> + pp = &pci->pp;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = intel_pcie_get_resources(pdev);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret)
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + data = device_get_match_data(dev);
>>>>>>>> + pci->ops = &intel_pcie_ops;
>>>>>>>> + pci->version = data->pcie_ver;
>>>>>>>> + pci->atu_base = pci->dbi_base + data->pcie_atu_offset;
>>>>>>>> + pp->ops = &intel_pcie_dw_ops;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + ret = dw_pcie_host_init(pp);
>>>>>>>> + if (ret) {
>>>>>>>> + dev_err(dev, "cannot initialize host\n");
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> Add a new line after the closing brace.
>>>>>> Ok
>>>>>>>> + /* Intel PCIe doesn't configure IO region, so configure
>>>>>>>> + * viewport to not to access IO region during register
>>>>>>>> + * read write operations.
>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>> + pci->num_viewport = data->num_viewport;
>>>>>>>> + dev_info(dev,
>>>>>>>> + "Intel AXI PCIe Root Complex Port %d Init Done\n", lpp->id);
>>>>>>>> + return ret;
>>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const struct dev_pm_ops intel_pcie_pm_ops = {
>>>>>>>> + SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS(intel_pcie_suspend_noirq,
>>>>>>>> + intel_pcie_resume_noirq)
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static const struct of_device_id of_intel_pcie_match[] = {
>>>>>>>> + { .compatible = "intel,lgm-pcie", .data = &pcie_data },
>>>>>>>> + {}
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> +static struct platform_driver intel_pcie_driver = {
>>>>>>>> + .probe = intel_pcie_probe,
>>>>>>>> + .remove = intel_pcie_remove,
>>>>>>>> + .driver = {
>>>>>>>> + .name = "intel-lgm-pcie",
>>>>>>> Is there a reason why the we use intel-lgm-pcie here and pcie-intel-axi
>>>>>>> elsewhere? What does lgm mean?
>>>>>> lgm is the name of intel SoC.  I will name it to pcie-intel-axi to be
>>>>>> generic.
>>>>> I'm keen to ensure that it is consistently named. I've seen other comments
>>>>> regarding what the name should be - I don't have a strong opinion though
>>>>> I do think that *-axi may be too generic.
>> This PCIe driver is for the Intel Gateway SoCs. So how about naming it is as
>> "pcie-intel-gw"; pcie-intel-gw.c and Kconfig as PCIE_INTEL_GW.
> I don't have a problem with this, though others may have differing views.
Sure. thank you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrew Murray
>
>> Regards,
>> Dilip
>>
>>>> Ok, i will check and get back to you on this.
>>>> Regards,
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Andrew Murray
>>>
>>>> Dilip
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew Murray
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andrew Murray
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> + .of_match_table = of_intel_pcie_match,
>>>>>>>> + .pm = &intel_pcie_pm_ops,
>>>>>>>> + },
>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>> +builtin_platform_driver(intel_pcie_driver);
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 2.11.0
>>>>>>>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-12 08:59    [W:0.178 / U:3.364 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site