lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 3/3] PCI: uniphier: Add misc interrupt handler to invoke PME and AER
    From
    Date
    Hi Pali.

    On 2021/07/18 9:51, Pali Rohar wrote:

    > Hello Kunihiko! Now I found also this older email...
    >
    > On Friday 27 November 2020 21:02:05 Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
    > > Hi Bjorn Lorenzo,
    > >
    > > On 2020/11/25 19:23, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
    > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 05:20:37PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
    > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 10:31:43AM +0900, Kunihiko Hayashi wrote:
    > > > > > This patch adds misc interrupt handler to detect and invoke PME/AER event.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > In UniPhier PCIe controller, PME/AER signals are assigned to the same
    > > > > > signal as MSI by the internal logic. These signals should be detected by
    > > > > > the internal register, however, DWC MSI handler can't handle these signals.
    > > > >
    > > > > I don't know what "PME/AER signals are assigned to the same signal as
    > > > > MSI" means.
    > > >
    > > > The host controller embeds an interrupt-controller whose IRQ wire output
    > > > is cascaded into the main interrupt controller.
    > > >
    > > > The host-bridge embedded controller receives MSI writes from devices
    > > > and it turns them into an edge IRQ into the main interrupt controller.
    > > >
    > > > To ack/mask the MSIs at host contoller interrupt controller level, there
    > > > is a control register in the host controller that needs handling upon
    > > > IRQ reception.
    > >
    > > Thanks for explaining that.
    > > In my understanding, PME/AER signals are cascaded to MSI by embedded
    > > interrupt controller (not "assigned").
    > >
    > >
    > > > The *RP* (and AFAIU the RP *only*) signals the PME/AER MSI using the
    > > > same wire to the main interrupt controller but its ack/mask is handled
    > > > by a different bit in the host bridge control register above, therefore
    > > > the cascaded IRQ isr needs to know which virq it is actually handling
    > > > to ack/mask accordingly.
    > >
    > > Sorry what is RP? Root complex or something?
    >
    > RP = Root Port
    >
    > In lspci output you can find it as "root" of the tree topology and
    > should have "PCI bridge" class/name.

    Ok, I understand.

    >
    > > > IMO this should be modelled with a separate IRQ domain and chip for
    > > > the root port (yes this implies describing the root port in the dts
    > > > file with a separate msi-parent).
    > > >
    > > > This series as it stands is a kludge.
    > >
    > > I see. However I need some time to consider the way to separate IRQ domain.
    > > Is there any idea or example to handle PME/AER with IRQ domain?
    >
    > Seems that you are dealing with very similar issues as me with aardvark
    > driver.
    >
    > As an inspiration look at my aardvark patch which setup separate IRQ
    > domain for PME, AER and HP interrupts:
    > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20210506153153.30454-32-pali@kernel.org/
    >
    > Thanks to custom driver map_irq function, it is not needed to describe
    > root port with separate msi-parent in DTS.

    I need to understand your solution, though, this might be the same situation as my driver.

    > > > > I'm trying to figure out if this is talking about PME/AER MSI vector
    > > > > numbers (probably not)
    >
    > Bjorn, see my email, based on my experience with aardvark controller I
    > think they are MSI vector numbers, but controller instead uses own
    > proprietary way how to signal PME and AER interrupts.
    > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20210718002614.3l74hlondwgthuby@pali/
    >
    > > > > or some internal wire that's not
    > > > > architecturally visible or what.
    > > > >
    > > > > Probably also not related to the fact that PME, hotplug, and bandwidth
    > > > > notifications share the same MSI/MSI-X vector.
    > > > >
    > > > > Is this something that's going to be applicable to all the DWC-based
    > > > > drivers?
    > >
    > > I think that this feature depends on the vendor specification.
    > > At least, the registers to control or check these signals are implemented
    > > in the vendor's logic.
    > >
    > >
    > > > > > DWC MSI handler calls .msi_host_isr() callback function, that detects
    > > > > > PME/AER signals with the internal register and invokes the interrupt
    > > > > > with PME/AER vIRQ numbers.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > These vIRQ numbers is obtained from portdrv in uniphier_add_pcie_port()
    > > > > > function.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
    > > > > > Cc: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>
    > > > > > Cc: Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>
    > > > > > Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
    > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@socionext.com>
    > > > > > Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
    > > > > > ---
    > > > > > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
    > > > > > 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
    > > > > >
    > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
    b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
    > > > > > index 4817626..237537a 100644
    > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
    > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-uniphier.c
    > > > > > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
    > > > > > #include <linux/reset.h>
    > > > > > #include "pcie-designware.h"
    > > > > > +#include "../../pcie/portdrv.h"
    > > > > > #define PCL_PINCTRL0 0x002c
    > > > > > #define PCL_PERST_PLDN_REGEN BIT(12)
    > > > > > @@ -44,7 +45,9 @@
    > > > > > #define PCL_SYS_AUX_PWR_DET BIT(8)
    > > > > > #define PCL_RCV_INT 0x8108
    > > > > > +#define PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_INT_MASK GENMASK(28, 25)
    > > > > > #define PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_ENABLE GENMASK(20, 17)
    > > > > > +#define PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_MSI_MASK GENMASK(12, 9)
    > > > > > #define PCL_CFG_BW_MGT_STATUS BIT(4)
    > > > > > #define PCL_CFG_LINK_AUTO_BW_STATUS BIT(3)
    > > > > > #define PCL_CFG_AER_RC_ERR_MSI_STATUS BIT(2)
    > > > > > @@ -68,6 +71,8 @@ struct uniphier_pcie_priv {
    > > > > > struct reset_control *rst;
    > > > > > struct phy *phy;
    > > > > > struct irq_domain *legacy_irq_domain;
    > > > > > + int aer_irq;
    > > > > > + int pme_irq;
    > > > > > };
    > > > > > #define to_uniphier_pcie(x) dev_get_drvdata((x)->dev)
    > > > > > @@ -167,7 +172,15 @@ static void uniphier_pcie_stop_link(struct dw_pcie *pci)
    > > > > > static void uniphier_pcie_irq_enable(struct uniphier_pcie_priv *priv)
    > > > > > {
    > > > > > - writel(PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_ENABLE, priv->base + PCL_RCV_INT);
    > > > > > + u32 val;
    > > > > > +
    > > > > > + val = PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_ENABLE;
    > > > > > + if (pci_msi_enabled())
    > > > > > + val |= PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_INT_MASK;
    > > > > > + else
    > > > > > + val |= PCL_RCV_INT_ALL_MSI_MASK;
    > > > >
    > > > > I'm confused about how this works. Root Ports can signal AER errors
    > > > > with either INTx or MSI. This is controlled by the architected
    > > > > Interrupt Disable bit and the MSI/MSI-X enable bits (I'm looking at
    > > > > PCIe r5.0, sec 6.2.4.1.2).
    > > > >
    > > > > The code here doesn't look related to those bits. Does this code mean
    > > > > that if pci_msi_enabled(), the Root Port will always signal with MSI
    > > > > (if MSI Enable is set) and will *never* signal with INTx?
    > >
    > > According to the spec sheet, we need to set interrupt enable bit for either
    > > INTx or MSI, the other bit should be reset. These bits are in config space
    > > and handled by the framework.
    >
    > Is spec sheet available publicly?

    Sorry the spec sheet isn't open to the public.
    Currently initial configuration is to use MSI, and I assume MSI interrupt is used
    as default.

    Thank you,

    ---
    Best Regards
    Kunihiko Hayashi

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-07-22 19:35    [W:2.767 / U:0.020 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site