linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Tomasz Nowicki <tn@semihalf.com>
Cc: arnd@arndb.de, will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	rafael@kernel.org, hanjun.guo@linaro.org,
	Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com, okaya@codeaurora.org,
	jchandra@broadcom.com, robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com,
	mw@semihalf.com, Liviu.Dudau@arm.com, ddaney@caviumnetworks.com,
	wangyijing@huawei.com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com,
	msalter@redhat.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org,
	jcm@redhat.com, andrea.gallo@linaro.org, dhdang@apm.com,
	jeremy.linton@arm.com, liudongdong3@huawei.com,
	cov@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V9 11/11] ARM64/PCI: Support for ACPI based PCI host controller
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2016 12:22:43 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161123182243.GF16033@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <edf72769-e9c8-4617-8dc4-8f3d05a678e7@semihalf.com>

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 12:21:03PM +0100, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> Hi Bjorn,
> 
> On 23.11.2016 00:13, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >Hi Tomasz,
> >
> >On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 09:55:19PM +0200, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
> >>Implement pci_acpi_scan_root and other arch-specific call so that ARM64
> >>can start using ACPI to setup and enumerate PCI buses.
> >>
> >>Prior to buses enumeration the pci_acpi_scan_root() implementation looks
> >>for configuration space start address (obtained through ACPI _CBA method or
> >>MCFG interface). If succeed, it uses ECAM library to create new mapping.
> >>Then it attaches generic ECAM ops (pci_generic_ecam_ops) which are used
> >>for accessing configuration space later on.
> >>...
> >
> >>+static struct acpi_pci_root_ops acpi_pci_root_ops = {
> >>+	.release_info = pci_acpi_generic_release_info,
> >>+};
> >>+
> >>+/* Interface called from ACPI code to setup PCI host controller */
> >> struct pci_bus *pci_acpi_scan_root(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
> >> {
> >>-	/* TODO: Should be revisited when implementing PCI on ACPI */
> >>-	return NULL;
> >>+	int node = acpi_get_node(root->device->handle);
> >>+	struct acpi_pci_generic_root_info *ri;
> >>+	struct pci_bus *bus, *child;
> >>+
> >>+	ri = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*ri), GFP_KERNEL, node);
> >>+	if (!ri)
> >>+		return NULL;
> >>+
> >>+	ri->cfg = pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping(root);
> >>+	if (!ri->cfg) {
> >>+		kfree(ri);
> >>+		return NULL;
> >>+	}
> >>+
> >>+	acpi_pci_root_ops.pci_ops = &ri->cfg->ops->pci_ops;
> >
> >This has already been merged, but this isn't right, is it?  We're
> >writing a host controller-specific pointer into the single system-wide
> >acpi_pci_root_ops, then passing it on to acpi_pci_root_create().
> >
> >Today, I think ri->cfg->ops->pci_ops is always &pci_generic_ecam_ops,
> >from this path:
> >
> >  ri->cfg = pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping
> >    cfg = pci_ecam_create(..., &pci_generic_ecam_ops)
> >      cfg = kzalloc(...)
> >      cfg->ops = ops             # &pci_generic_ecam_ops
> >
> >But we're about to merge the ECAM quirks series, which will mean it
> >may not be &pci_generic_ecam_ops.  Even apart from the ECAM quirks, we
> >should avoid this pattern of putting device-specific info in a single
> >shared structure because it's too difficult to verify that it's
> >correct.
> >
> 
> Well spotted. I agree, we need to fix this. How about this:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> index fb439c7..31c0e1c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/pci.c
> @@ -152,33 +152,35 @@ static void
> pci_acpi_generic_release_info(struct acpi_pci_root_info *ci)
> 
>         ri = container_of(ci, struct acpi_pci_generic_root_info, common);
>         pci_ecam_free(ri->cfg);
> +       kfree(ci->ops);
>         kfree(ri);
>  }
> 
> -static struct acpi_pci_root_ops acpi_pci_root_ops = {
> -       .release_info = pci_acpi_generic_release_info,
> -};
> -
>  /* Interface called from ACPI code to setup PCI host controller */
>  struct pci_bus *pci_acpi_scan_root(struct acpi_pci_root *root)
>  {
>         int node = acpi_get_node(root->device->handle);
>         struct acpi_pci_generic_root_info *ri;
>         struct pci_bus *bus, *child;
> +       struct acpi_pci_root_ops *root_ops;
> 
>         ri = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*ri), GFP_KERNEL, node);
>         if (!ri)
>                 return NULL;
> 
> +       root_ops = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*root_ops), GFP_KERNEL, node);
> +       if (!root_ops)
> +               return NULL;
> +
>         ri->cfg = pci_acpi_setup_ecam_mapping(root);
>         if (!ri->cfg) {
>                 kfree(ri);
> +               kfree(root_ops);
>                 return NULL;
>         }
> 
> -       acpi_pci_root_ops.pci_ops = &ri->cfg->ops->pci_ops;
> -       bus = acpi_pci_root_create(root, &acpi_pci_root_ops, &ri->common,
> -                                  ri->cfg);
> +       root_ops->release_info = pci_acpi_generic_release_info;
> +       root_ops->pci_ops = &ri->cfg->ops->pci_ops;
> +       bus = acpi_pci_root_create(root, root_ops, &ri->common, ri->cfg);
>         if (!bus)
>                 return NULL;
> 
> Of course, this should be the part of ECAM quirks core patches.
> 
> The other option we have is to remove "struct pci_ops *pci_ops;"
> from acpi_pci_root_ops structure and pass struct pci_ops as an extra
> argument to acpi_pci_root_create(). What do you think?

I think your patch above is fine and avoids the need to change the x86 and
ia64 code.  Would you mind packaging this up with a changelog and
signed-off-by?  I can take care of putting it in the ECAM series.

Thanks,
  Bjorn

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-23 18:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-10 19:55 [PATCH V9 00/11] Support for ARM64 ACPI based PCI host controller Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 01/11] PCI/ECAM: Move ecam.h to linux/include/pci-ecam.h Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 02/11] PCI/ECAM: Add parent device field to pci_config_window Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 03/11] PCI: Add new function to unmap IO resources Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 04/11] ACPI/PCI: Support IO resources when parsing PCI host bridge resources Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 05/11] ACPI/PCI: Add generic MCFG table handling Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 23:25   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 06/11] PCI: Refactor generic bus domain assignment Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 20:50   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 07/11] PCI: Factor DT specific pci_bus_find_domain_nr() code out Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 20:51   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 08/11] ARM64/PCI: Add ACPI hook to assign domain number Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 09/11] ARM64/PCI: ACPI support for legacy IRQs parsing and consolidation with DT code Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 23:36   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-13 10:00     ` Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-13 10:40     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-13 15:56       ` Liviu.Dudau
2016-06-13 20:01       ` Duc Dang
2016-06-14  9:30         ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 10/11] ARM64/PCI: Implement ACPI low-level calls to access PCI_Config region from AML Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 20:54   ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2016-06-10 19:55 ` [PATCH V9 11/11] ARM64/PCI: Support for ACPI based PCI host controller Tomasz Nowicki
2016-11-22 23:13   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-11-23 11:21     ` Tomasz Nowicki
2016-11-23 18:22       ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2016-11-24 11:10         ` Tomasz Nowicki
2016-06-10 23:41 ` [PATCH V9 00/11] Support for ARM64 " Bjorn Helgaas
2016-06-10 23:50   ` Jon Masters
2016-06-10 23:58   ` [Linaro-acpi] " Jon Masters
2016-06-11  9:51   ` Tomasz Nowicki

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20161123182243.GF16033@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com \
    --to=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=Liviu.Dudau@arm.com \
    --cc=Lorenzo.Pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com \
    --cc=andrea.gallo@linaro.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=dhdang@apm.com \
    --cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
    --cc=jchandra@broadcom.com \
    --cc=jcm@redhat.com \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liudongdong3@huawei.com \
    --cc=msalter@redhat.com \
    --cc=mw@semihalf.com \
    --cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=robert.richter@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=tn@semihalf.com \
    --cc=wangyijing@huawei.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).