All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "zhichang.yuan" <yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com>
To: "liviu.dudau@arm.com" <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
	Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>
Cc: "catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"olof@lixom.net" <olof@lixom.net>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
	"minyard@acm.org" <minyard@acm.org>,
	"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	"zourongrong@gmail.com" <zourongrong@gmail.com>,
	John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>,
	"zhichang.yuan02@gmail.com" <zhichang.yuan02@gmail.com>,
	"kantyzc@163.com" <kantyzc@163.com>,
	"xuwei (O)" <xuwei5@hisilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/3] ARM64 LPC: Add missing range exception for special ISA
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 14:24:06 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58241286.1070107@hisilicon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161109165044.GE10219@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi,Liviu,

Thanks for your comments!


On 2016/11/10 0:50, liviu.dudau@arm.com wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 04:16:17PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
>> Hi Liviu
>>
>> Thanks for reviewing
>>
> 
> [removed some irrelevant part of discussion, avoid crazy formatting]
> 
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * addr_is_indirect_io - check whether the input taddr is for
>>> indirectIO.
>>>> + * @taddr: the io address to be checked.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Returns 1 when taddr is in the range; otherwise return 0.
>>>> + */
>>>> +int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	if (arm64_extio_ops->start > taddr || arm64_extio_ops->end <
>>> taddr)
>>>
>>> start >= taddr ?
>>
>> Nope... if  (taddr < arm64_extio_ops->start || taddr > arm64_extio_ops->end)
>> then taddr is outside the range [start; end] and will return 0; otherwise
>> it will return 1...
> 
> Oops, sorry, did not pay attention to the returned value. The check is
> correct as it is, no need to change then.
> 
>>
>>>
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	return 1;
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>  BUILD_EXTIO(b, u8)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/address.c b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> index 02b2903..cc2a05d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> @@ -479,6 +479,50 @@ static int of_empty_ranges_quirk(struct
>>> device_node *np)
>>>>  	return false;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * of_isa_indirect_io - get the IO address from some isa reg
>>> property value.
>>>> + *	For some isa/lpc devices, no ranges property in ancestor node.
>>>> + *	The device addresses are described directly in their regs
>>> property.
>>>> + *	This fixup function will be called to get the IO address of
>>> isa/lpc
>>>> + *	devices when the normal of_translation failed.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * @parent:	points to the parent dts node;
>>>> + * @bus:		points to the of_bus which can be used to parse
>>> address;
>>>> + * @addr:	the address from reg property;
>>>> + * @na:		the address cell counter of @addr;
>>>> + * @presult:	store the address paresed from @addr;
>>>> + *
>>>> + * return 1 when successfully get the I/O address;
>>>> + * 0 will return for some failures.
>>>
>>> Bah, you are returning a signed int, why 0 for failure? Return a
>>> negative value with
>>> error codes. Otherwise change the return value into a bool.
>>
>> Yes we'll move to bool
>>
>>>
>>>> + */
>>>> +static int of_get_isa_indirect_io(struct device_node *parent,
>>>> +				struct of_bus *bus, __be32 *addr,
>>>> +				int na, u64 *presult)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	unsigned int flags;
>>>> +	unsigned int rlen;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* whether support indirectIO */
>>>> +	if (!indirect_io_enabled())
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!of_bus_isa_match(parent))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	flags = bus->get_flags(addr);
>>>> +	if (!(flags & IORESOURCE_IO))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* there is ranges property, apply the normal translation
>>> directly. */
>>>
>>> s/there is ranges/if we have a 'ranges'/
>>
>> Thanks for spotting this
>>
>>>
>>>> +	if (of_get_property(parent, "ranges", &rlen))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	*presult = of_read_number(addr + 1, na - 1);
>>>> +	/* this fixup is only valid for specific I/O range. */
>>>> +	return addr_is_indirect_io(*presult);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>  static int of_translate_one(struct device_node *parent, struct
>>> of_bus *bus,
>>>>  			    struct of_bus *pbus, __be32 *addr,
>>>>  			    int na, int ns, int pna, const char *rprop)
>>>> @@ -595,6 +639,15 @@ static u64 __of_translate_address(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  			result = of_read_number(addr, na);
>>>>  			break;
>>>>  		}
>>>> +		/*
>>>> +		 * For indirectIO device which has no ranges property, get
>>>> +		 * the address from reg directly.
>>>> +		 */
>>>> +		if (of_get_isa_indirect_io(dev, bus, addr, na, &result)) {
>>>> +			pr_debug("isa indirectIO matched(%s)..addr =
>>> 0x%llx\n",
>>>> +				of_node_full_name(dev), result);
>>>> +			break;
>>>> +		}
>>>>
>>>>  		/* Get new parent bus and counts */
>>>>  		pbus = of_match_bus(parent);
>>>> @@ -688,8 +741,9 @@ static int __of_address_to_resource(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  	if (taddr == OF_BAD_ADDR)
>>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>>  	memset(r, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>>> -	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO) {
>>>> +	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO && taddr >= PCIBIOS_MIN_IO) {
>>>>  		unsigned long port;
>>>> +
>>>>  		port = pci_address_to_pio(taddr);
>>>>  		if (port == (unsigned long)-1)
>>>>  			return -EINVAL;
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> index ba34907..1a08511 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> @@ -3263,7 +3263,7 @@ int __weak pci_register_io_range(phys_addr_t
>>> addr, resource_size_t size)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>
>>>>  	/* check if the range hasn't been previously recorded */
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> @@ -3312,7 +3312,7 @@ phys_addr_t pci_pio_to_address(unsigned long
>>> pio)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>
>>> Have you checked that pci_pio_to_address still returns valid values
>>> after this? I know that
>>> you are trying to take into account PCIBIOS_MIN_IO limit when
>>> allocating reserving the IO ranges,
>>> but the values added in the io_range_list are still starting from zero,
>>> no from PCIBIOS_MIN_IO,
>>
>> I think you're wrong here as in pci_address_to_pio we have:
>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>
>> This should be enough to guarantee that the PIOs start at
>> PCIBIOS_MIN_IO...right?
> 
> I don't think you can guarantee that the pio value that gets passed into
> pci_pio_to_address() always comes from a previously returned value by
> pci_address_to_pio(). Maybe you can add a check in pci_pio_to_address()
> 
> 	if (pio < PCIBIOS_MIN_IO)
> 		return address;
> 
> to avoid adding more checks in the list_for_each_entry() loop.
> 

I will register some ranges to the list and test it later.

But from my understanding, pci_pio_to_address() should can return the right
original physical address.


According to the algorithm, the output PIO ranges are consecutive, just like this:


					input pio of pci_pio_to_address()
						|
						V
|----------------|--------------------------|------|-----------|
					    ^
					    |
					allocated_size is here


The change of this patch just make the start PIO from ZERO to PCIBIOS_MIN_IO.

in pci_pio_to_address(), for one input pio which fall into any PIO segment, the
return address will be:

address = range->start + pio - allocated_size;

Since allocated_size is the total range size of all IO ranges before the one
where pio belong, then (pio - allocated_size) is the offset to the range start,
So....


Thanks!
Zhichang

> Best regards,
> Liviu
> 
>>
>>
>>> so the calculation of the address in this function could return
>>> negative values casted to pci_addr_t.
>>>
>>> Maybe you want to adjust the range->start value in
>>> pci_register_io_range() as well to have it
>>> offset by PCIBIOS_MIN_IO as well.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Liviu
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  	if (pio > IO_SPACE_LIMIT)
>>>>  		return address;
>>>> @@ -3335,7 +3335,7 @@ unsigned long __weak
>>> pci_address_to_pio(phys_addr_t address)
>>>>  {
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *res;
>>>> -	resource_size_t offset = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>  	unsigned long addr = -1;
>>>>
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_address.h b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> index 3786473..deec469 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> @@ -24,6 +24,23 @@ struct of_pci_range {
>>>>  #define for_each_of_pci_range(parser, range) \
>>>>  	for (; of_pci_range_parser_one(parser, range);)
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +#define indirect_io_enabled indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +static inline bool indirect_io_enabled(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return false;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +#define addr_is_indirect_io addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +static inline int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  /* Translate a DMA address from device space to CPU space */
>>>>  extern u64 of_translate_dma_address(struct device_node *dev,
>>>>  				    const __be32 *in_addr);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> index 0e49f70..7f6bbb6 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> @@ -2130,4 +2130,12 @@ static inline bool pci_ari_enabled(struct
>>> pci_bus *bus)
>>>>  /* provide the legacy pci_dma_* API */
>>>>  #include <linux/pci-dma-compat.h>
>>>>
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * define this macro here to refrain from compilation error for some
>>>> + * platforms. Please keep this macro at the end of this header file.
>>>> + */
>>>> +#ifndef PCIBIOS_MIN_IO
>>>> +#define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO		0
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  #endif /* LINUX_PCI_H */
>>>> --
>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci"
>>> in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "zhichang.yuan" <yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com>
To: "liviu.dudau@arm.com" <liviu.dudau@arm.com>,
	Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com>
Cc: "catalin.marinas@arm.com" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	"will.deacon@arm.com" <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"robh+dt@kernel.org" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
	"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"olof@lixom.net" <olof@lixom.net>,
	"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linuxarm <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
	"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" <linux-serial@vger.kernel.org>,
	"minyard@acm.org" <minyard@acm.org>,
	benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 2/3] ARM64 LPC: Add missing range exception for special ISA
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 14:24:06 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58241286.1070107@hisilicon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161109165044.GE10219@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi,Liviu,

Thanks for your comments!


On 2016/11/10 0:50, liviu.dudau@arm.com wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 04:16:17PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
>> Hi Liviu
>>
>> Thanks for reviewing
>>
> 
> [removed some irrelevant part of discussion, avoid crazy formatting]
> 
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * addr_is_indirect_io - check whether the input taddr is for
>>> indirectIO.
>>>> + * @taddr: the io address to be checked.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Returns 1 when taddr is in the range; otherwise return 0.
>>>> + */
>>>> +int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	if (arm64_extio_ops->start > taddr || arm64_extio_ops->end <
>>> taddr)
>>>
>>> start >= taddr ?
>>
>> Nope... if  (taddr < arm64_extio_ops->start || taddr > arm64_extio_ops->end)
>> then taddr is outside the range [start; end] and will return 0; otherwise
>> it will return 1...
> 
> Oops, sorry, did not pay attention to the returned value. The check is
> correct as it is, no need to change then.
> 
>>
>>>
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	return 1;
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>  BUILD_EXTIO(b, u8)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/address.c b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> index 02b2903..cc2a05d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> @@ -479,6 +479,50 @@ static int of_empty_ranges_quirk(struct
>>> device_node *np)
>>>>  	return false;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * of_isa_indirect_io - get the IO address from some isa reg
>>> property value.
>>>> + *	For some isa/lpc devices, no ranges property in ancestor node.
>>>> + *	The device addresses are described directly in their regs
>>> property.
>>>> + *	This fixup function will be called to get the IO address of
>>> isa/lpc
>>>> + *	devices when the normal of_translation failed.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * @parent:	points to the parent dts node;
>>>> + * @bus:		points to the of_bus which can be used to parse
>>> address;
>>>> + * @addr:	the address from reg property;
>>>> + * @na:		the address cell counter of @addr;
>>>> + * @presult:	store the address paresed from @addr;
>>>> + *
>>>> + * return 1 when successfully get the I/O address;
>>>> + * 0 will return for some failures.
>>>
>>> Bah, you are returning a signed int, why 0 for failure? Return a
>>> negative value with
>>> error codes. Otherwise change the return value into a bool.
>>
>> Yes we'll move to bool
>>
>>>
>>>> + */
>>>> +static int of_get_isa_indirect_io(struct device_node *parent,
>>>> +				struct of_bus *bus, __be32 *addr,
>>>> +				int na, u64 *presult)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	unsigned int flags;
>>>> +	unsigned int rlen;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* whether support indirectIO */
>>>> +	if (!indirect_io_enabled())
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!of_bus_isa_match(parent))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	flags = bus->get_flags(addr);
>>>> +	if (!(flags & IORESOURCE_IO))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* there is ranges property, apply the normal translation
>>> directly. */
>>>
>>> s/there is ranges/if we have a 'ranges'/
>>
>> Thanks for spotting this
>>
>>>
>>>> +	if (of_get_property(parent, "ranges", &rlen))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	*presult = of_read_number(addr + 1, na - 1);
>>>> +	/* this fixup is only valid for specific I/O range. */
>>>> +	return addr_is_indirect_io(*presult);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>  static int of_translate_one(struct device_node *parent, struct
>>> of_bus *bus,
>>>>  			    struct of_bus *pbus, __be32 *addr,
>>>>  			    int na, int ns, int pna, const char *rprop)
>>>> @@ -595,6 +639,15 @@ static u64 __of_translate_address(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  			result = of_read_number(addr, na);
>>>>  			break;
>>>>  		}
>>>> +		/*
>>>> +		 * For indirectIO device which has no ranges property, get
>>>> +		 * the address from reg directly.
>>>> +		 */
>>>> +		if (of_get_isa_indirect_io(dev, bus, addr, na, &result)) {
>>>> +			pr_debug("isa indirectIO matched(%s)..addr =
>>> 0x%llx\n",
>>>> +				of_node_full_name(dev), result);
>>>> +			break;
>>>> +		}
>>>>
>>>>  		/* Get new parent bus and counts */
>>>>  		pbus = of_match_bus(parent);
>>>> @@ -688,8 +741,9 @@ static int __of_address_to_resource(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  	if (taddr == OF_BAD_ADDR)
>>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>>  	memset(r, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>>> -	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO) {
>>>> +	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO && taddr >= PCIBIOS_MIN_IO) {
>>>>  		unsigned long port;
>>>> +
>>>>  		port = pci_address_to_pio(taddr);
>>>>  		if (port == (unsigned long)-1)
>>>>  			return -EINVAL;
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> index ba34907..1a08511 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> @@ -3263,7 +3263,7 @@ int __weak pci_register_io_range(phys_addr_t
>>> addr, resource_size_t size)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>
>>>>  	/* check if the range hasn't been previously recorded */
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> @@ -3312,7 +3312,7 @@ phys_addr_t pci_pio_to_address(unsigned long
>>> pio)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>
>>> Have you checked that pci_pio_to_address still returns valid values
>>> after this? I know that
>>> you are trying to take into account PCIBIOS_MIN_IO limit when
>>> allocating reserving the IO ranges,
>>> but the values added in the io_range_list are still starting from zero,
>>> no from PCIBIOS_MIN_IO,
>>
>> I think you're wrong here as in pci_address_to_pio we have:
>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>
>> This should be enough to guarantee that the PIOs start at
>> PCIBIOS_MIN_IO...right?
> 
> I don't think you can guarantee that the pio value that gets passed into
> pci_pio_to_address() always comes from a previously returned value by
> pci_address_to_pio(). Maybe you can add a check in pci_pio_to_address()
> 
> 	if (pio < PCIBIOS_MIN_IO)
> 		return address;
> 
> to avoid adding more checks in the list_for_each_entry() loop.
> 

I will register some ranges to the list and test it later.

But from my understanding, pci_pio_to_address() should can return the right
original physical address.


According to the algorithm, the output PIO ranges are consecutive, just like this:


					input pio of pci_pio_to_address()
						|
						V
|----------------|--------------------------|------|-----------|
					    ^
					    |
					allocated_size is here


The change of this patch just make the start PIO from ZERO to PCIBIOS_MIN_IO.

in pci_pio_to_address(), for one input pio which fall into any PIO segment, the
return address will be:

address = range->start + pio - allocated_size;

Since allocated_size is the total range size of all IO ranges before the one
where pio belong, then (pio - allocated_size) is the offset to the range start,
So....


Thanks!
Zhichang

> Best regards,
> Liviu
> 
>>
>>
>>> so the calculation of the address in this function could return
>>> negative values casted to pci_addr_t.
>>>
>>> Maybe you want to adjust the range->start value in
>>> pci_register_io_range() as well to have it
>>> offset by PCIBIOS_MIN_IO as well.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Liviu
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  	if (pio > IO_SPACE_LIMIT)
>>>>  		return address;
>>>> @@ -3335,7 +3335,7 @@ unsigned long __weak
>>> pci_address_to_pio(phys_addr_t address)
>>>>  {
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *res;
>>>> -	resource_size_t offset = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>  	unsigned long addr = -1;
>>>>
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_address.h b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> index 3786473..deec469 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> @@ -24,6 +24,23 @@ struct of_pci_range {
>>>>  #define for_each_of_pci_range(parser, range) \
>>>>  	for (; of_pci_range_parser_one(parser, range);)
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +#define indirect_io_enabled indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +static inline bool indirect_io_enabled(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return false;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +#define addr_is_indirect_io addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +static inline int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  /* Translate a DMA address from device space to CPU space */
>>>>  extern u64 of_translate_dma_address(struct device_node *dev,
>>>>  				    const __be32 *in_addr);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> index 0e49f70..7f6bbb6 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> @@ -2130,4 +2130,12 @@ static inline bool pci_ari_enabled(struct
>>> pci_bus *bus)
>>>>  /* provide the legacy pci_dma_* API */
>>>>  #include <linux/pci-dma-compat.h>
>>>>
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * define this macro here to refrain from compilation error for some
>>>> + * platforms. Please keep this macro at the end of this header file.
>>>> + */
>>>> +#ifndef PCIBIOS_MIN_IO
>>>> +#define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO		0
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  #endif /* LINUX_PCI_H */
>>>> --
>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci"
>>> in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com (zhichang.yuan)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH V5 2/3] ARM64 LPC: Add missing range exception for special ISA
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 14:24:06 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <58241286.1070107@hisilicon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161109165044.GE10219@e106497-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi,Liviu,

Thanks for your comments!


On 2016/11/10 0:50, liviu.dudau at arm.com wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 04:16:17PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
>> Hi Liviu
>>
>> Thanks for reviewing
>>
> 
> [removed some irrelevant part of discussion, avoid crazy formatting]
> 
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * addr_is_indirect_io - check whether the input taddr is for
>>> indirectIO.
>>>> + * @taddr: the io address to be checked.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Returns 1 when taddr is in the range; otherwise return 0.
>>>> + */
>>>> +int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	if (arm64_extio_ops->start > taddr || arm64_extio_ops->end <
>>> taddr)
>>>
>>> start >= taddr ?
>>
>> Nope... if  (taddr < arm64_extio_ops->start || taddr > arm64_extio_ops->end)
>> then taddr is outside the range [start; end] and will return 0; otherwise
>> it will return 1...
> 
> Oops, sorry, did not pay attention to the returned value. The check is
> correct as it is, no need to change then.
> 
>>
>>>
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	return 1;
>>>> +}
>>>>
>>>>  BUILD_EXTIO(b, u8)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/address.c b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> index 02b2903..cc2a05d 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/of/address.c
>>>> @@ -479,6 +479,50 @@ static int of_empty_ranges_quirk(struct
>>> device_node *np)
>>>>  	return false;
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * of_isa_indirect_io - get the IO address from some isa reg
>>> property value.
>>>> + *	For some isa/lpc devices, no ranges property in ancestor node.
>>>> + *	The device addresses are described directly in their regs
>>> property.
>>>> + *	This fixup function will be called to get the IO address of
>>> isa/lpc
>>>> + *	devices when the normal of_translation failed.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * @parent:	points to the parent dts node;
>>>> + * @bus:		points to the of_bus which can be used to parse
>>> address;
>>>> + * @addr:	the address from reg property;
>>>> + * @na:		the address cell counter of @addr;
>>>> + * @presult:	store the address paresed from @addr;
>>>> + *
>>>> + * return 1 when successfully get the I/O address;
>>>> + * 0 will return for some failures.
>>>
>>> Bah, you are returning a signed int, why 0 for failure? Return a
>>> negative value with
>>> error codes. Otherwise change the return value into a bool.
>>
>> Yes we'll move to bool
>>
>>>
>>>> + */
>>>> +static int of_get_isa_indirect_io(struct device_node *parent,
>>>> +				struct of_bus *bus, __be32 *addr,
>>>> +				int na, u64 *presult)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	unsigned int flags;
>>>> +	unsigned int rlen;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* whether support indirectIO */
>>>> +	if (!indirect_io_enabled())
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!of_bus_isa_match(parent))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	flags = bus->get_flags(addr);
>>>> +	if (!(flags & IORESOURCE_IO))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* there is ranges property, apply the normal translation
>>> directly. */
>>>
>>> s/there is ranges/if we have a 'ranges'/
>>
>> Thanks for spotting this
>>
>>>
>>>> +	if (of_get_property(parent, "ranges", &rlen))
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +	*presult = of_read_number(addr + 1, na - 1);
>>>> +	/* this fixup is only valid for specific I/O range. */
>>>> +	return addr_is_indirect_io(*presult);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>  static int of_translate_one(struct device_node *parent, struct
>>> of_bus *bus,
>>>>  			    struct of_bus *pbus, __be32 *addr,
>>>>  			    int na, int ns, int pna, const char *rprop)
>>>> @@ -595,6 +639,15 @@ static u64 __of_translate_address(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  			result = of_read_number(addr, na);
>>>>  			break;
>>>>  		}
>>>> +		/*
>>>> +		 * For indirectIO device which has no ranges property, get
>>>> +		 * the address from reg directly.
>>>> +		 */
>>>> +		if (of_get_isa_indirect_io(dev, bus, addr, na, &result)) {
>>>> +			pr_debug("isa indirectIO matched(%s)..addr =
>>> 0x%llx\n",
>>>> +				of_node_full_name(dev), result);
>>>> +			break;
>>>> +		}
>>>>
>>>>  		/* Get new parent bus and counts */
>>>>  		pbus = of_match_bus(parent);
>>>> @@ -688,8 +741,9 @@ static int __of_address_to_resource(struct
>>> device_node *dev,
>>>>  	if (taddr == OF_BAD_ADDR)
>>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>>  	memset(r, 0, sizeof(struct resource));
>>>> -	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO) {
>>>> +	if (flags & IORESOURCE_IO && taddr >= PCIBIOS_MIN_IO) {
>>>>  		unsigned long port;
>>>> +
>>>>  		port = pci_address_to_pio(taddr);
>>>>  		if (port == (unsigned long)-1)
>>>>  			return -EINVAL;
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> index ba34907..1a08511 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
>>>> @@ -3263,7 +3263,7 @@ int __weak pci_register_io_range(phys_addr_t
>>> addr, resource_size_t size)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>
>>>>  	/* check if the range hasn't been previously recorded */
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> @@ -3312,7 +3312,7 @@ phys_addr_t pci_pio_to_address(unsigned long
>>> pio)
>>>>
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *range;
>>>> -	resource_size_t allocated_size = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t allocated_size = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>
>>> Have you checked that pci_pio_to_address still returns valid values
>>> after this? I know that
>>> you are trying to take into account PCIBIOS_MIN_IO limit when
>>> allocating reserving the IO ranges,
>>> but the values added in the io_range_list are still starting from zero,
>>> no from PCIBIOS_MIN_IO,
>>
>> I think you're wrong here as in pci_address_to_pio we have:
>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>
>> This should be enough to guarantee that the PIOs start at
>> PCIBIOS_MIN_IO...right?
> 
> I don't think you can guarantee that the pio value that gets passed into
> pci_pio_to_address() always comes from a previously returned value by
> pci_address_to_pio(). Maybe you can add a check in pci_pio_to_address()
> 
> 	if (pio < PCIBIOS_MIN_IO)
> 		return address;
> 
> to avoid adding more checks in the list_for_each_entry() loop.
> 

I will register some ranges to the list and test it later.

But from my understanding, pci_pio_to_address() should can return the right
original physical address.


According to the algorithm, the output PIO ranges are consecutive? just like this:


					input pio of pci_pio_to_address()
						|
						V
|----------------|--------------------------|------|-----------|
					    ^
					    |
					allocated_size is here


The change of this patch just make the start PIO from ZERO to PCIBIOS_MIN_IO.

in pci_pio_to_address(), for one input pio which fall into any PIO segment, the
return address will be:

address = range->start + pio - allocated_size;

Since allocated_size is the total range size of all IO ranges before the one
where pio belong, then (pio - allocated_size) is the offset to the range start,
So....


Thanks!
Zhichang

> Best regards,
> Liviu
> 
>>
>>
>>> so the calculation of the address in this function could return
>>> negative values casted to pci_addr_t.
>>>
>>> Maybe you want to adjust the range->start value in
>>> pci_register_io_range() as well to have it
>>> offset by PCIBIOS_MIN_IO as well.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Liviu
>>>
>>>>
>>>>  	if (pio > IO_SPACE_LIMIT)
>>>>  		return address;
>>>> @@ -3335,7 +3335,7 @@ unsigned long __weak
>>> pci_address_to_pio(phys_addr_t address)
>>>>  {
>>>>  #ifdef PCI_IOBASE
>>>>  	struct io_range *res;
>>>> -	resource_size_t offset = 0;
>>>> +	resource_size_t offset = PCIBIOS_MIN_IO;
>>>>  	unsigned long addr = -1;
>>>>
>>>>  	spin_lock(&io_range_lock);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/of_address.h b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> index 3786473..deec469 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/of_address.h
>>>> @@ -24,6 +24,23 @@ struct of_pci_range {
>>>>  #define for_each_of_pci_range(parser, range) \
>>>>  	for (; of_pci_range_parser_one(parser, range);)
>>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +#define indirect_io_enabled indirect_io_enabled
>>>> +static inline bool indirect_io_enabled(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return false;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifndef addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +#define addr_is_indirect_io addr_is_indirect_io
>>>> +static inline int addr_is_indirect_io(u64 taddr)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  /* Translate a DMA address from device space to CPU space */
>>>>  extern u64 of_translate_dma_address(struct device_node *dev,
>>>>  				    const __be32 *in_addr);
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> index 0e49f70..7f6bbb6 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>>>> @@ -2130,4 +2130,12 @@ static inline bool pci_ari_enabled(struct
>>> pci_bus *bus)
>>>>  /* provide the legacy pci_dma_* API */
>>>>  #include <linux/pci-dma-compat.h>
>>>>
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * define this macro here to refrain from compilation error for some
>>>> + * platforms. Please keep this macro at the end of this header file.
>>>> + */
>>>> +#ifndef PCIBIOS_MIN_IO
>>>> +#define PCIBIOS_MIN_IO		0
>>>> +#endif
>>>> +
>>>>  #endif /* LINUX_PCI_H */
>>>> --
>>>> 1.9.1
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci"
>>> in
>>>> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
>>>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-10  6:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 286+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-08  3:47 [PATCH V5 0/3] ARM64 LPC: legacy ISA I/O support zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47 ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47 ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47 ` [PATCH V5 1/3] ARM64 LPC: Indirect ISA port IO introduced zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08 12:03   ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 12:03     ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 12:03     ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 16:09     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:09       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:09       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:09       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:15       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:15         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 23:16     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-08 23:16       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-08 23:16       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10  8:33       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  8:33         ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  8:33         ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10 11:22       ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-10 11:22         ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-10 19:32         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10 19:32           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10 19:32           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10 19:32           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-11 10:07           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:07             ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:07             ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-18  9:20             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18  9:20               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18  9:20               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 11:12               ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-18 11:12                 ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-18 11:12                 ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-18 11:38                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 11:38                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-21 12:58       ` John Garry
2016-11-21 12:58         ` John Garry
2016-11-21 12:58         ` John Garry
2016-11-08 16:12   ` Will Deacon
2016-11-08 16:12     ` Will Deacon
2016-11-08 16:12     ` Will Deacon
2016-11-08 16:33     ` John Garry
2016-11-08 16:33       ` John Garry
2016-11-08 16:33       ` John Garry
2016-11-08 16:33       ` John Garry
2016-11-08 16:49       ` Will Deacon
2016-11-08 16:49         ` Will Deacon
2016-11-08 17:05         ` John Garry
2016-11-08 17:05           ` John Garry
2016-11-08 17:05           ` John Garry
2016-11-08 22:35         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 22:35           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 22:35           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 11:29           ` John Garry
2016-11-09 11:29             ` John Garry
2016-11-09 11:29             ` John Garry
2016-11-09 21:33             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:33               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:33               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-12-22  8:15   ` Ming Lei
2016-12-22  8:15     ` Ming Lei
2016-12-22  8:15     ` Ming Lei
2016-12-22  8:15     ` Ming Lei
2016-12-23  1:43     ` zhichang.yuan
2016-12-23  1:43       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-12-23  1:43       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-12-23  1:43       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-12-23  7:24       ` Ming Lei
2016-12-23  7:24         ` Ming Lei
2016-12-23  7:24         ` Ming Lei
2016-12-23  7:24         ` Ming Lei
2017-01-06 11:43     ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-06 11:43       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-06 11:43       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-06 11:43       ` Arnd Bergmann
2017-01-07  1:25       ` 答复: " Yuanzhichang
2016-11-08  3:47 ` [PATCH V5 2/3] ARM64 LPC: Add missing range exception for special ISA zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  5:17   ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:17     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:17     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:17     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:27   ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:27     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  5:27     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08 11:49   ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 11:49     ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 16:19     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:19       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:19       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 17:10       ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 17:10         ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-08 17:10         ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-09 13:54       ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-09 13:54         ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-09 14:51         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 14:51           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 14:51           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 14:51           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 21:38         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:38           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:38           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-14 11:11           ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-14 11:11             ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-14 11:11             ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-18  9:22             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18  9:22               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18  9:22               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18  9:22               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 23:12     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-08 23:12       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-08 23:12       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-08 23:12       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-09 11:20       ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-09 11:20         ` Mark Rutland
2016-11-10  7:08         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10  7:08           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-10  7:08           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2016-11-09 11:39   ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-09 11:39     ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-09 11:39     ` liviu.dudau-5wv7dgnIgG8
2016-11-09 16:16     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 16:16       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 16:16       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 16:16       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 16:50       ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-09 16:50         ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-09 16:50         ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-09 16:50         ` liviu.dudau-5wv7dgnIgG8
2016-11-10  6:24         ` zhichang.yuan [this message]
2016-11-10  6:24           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  6:24           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  6:24           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10 16:06         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 16:06           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 16:06           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 16:06           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 10:37           ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 10:37             ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-11 10:37             ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 10:37             ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-08  3:47 ` [PATCH V5 3/3] ARM64 LPC: LPC driver implementation on Hip06 zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  3:47   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-08  6:11   ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  6:11     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08  6:11     ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-08 16:24   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-08 16:24     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 12:10     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 12:10       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 12:10       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 12:10       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-09 21:34       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:34         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:34         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-09 21:34         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10  6:40         ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  6:40           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  6:40           ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10  9:12           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10  9:12             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10  9:12             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 12:36             ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10 12:36               ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-10 12:36               ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-18 11:46               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 11:46                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 11:46                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 11:46                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 15:36             ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 15:36               ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 15:36               ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 15:36               ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-10 16:07               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 16:07                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 16:07                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-10 16:07                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-11 10:09                 ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:09                   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:09                   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:09                   ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 10:48                 ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 10:48                   ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-11 10:48                   ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 10:48                   ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 13:39                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 13:39                   ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 13:39                   ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 13:39                   ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 14:45                   ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 14:45                     ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-11 14:45                     ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 14:45                     ` liviu.dudau-5wv7dgnIgG8
2016-11-11 15:53                     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 15:53                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 15:53                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 15:53                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 18:16                       ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 18:16                         ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-11 18:16                         ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-11 18:16                         ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-14  8:26                         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-14  8:26                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-14  8:26                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-14  8:26                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-14 11:26                           ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-14 11:26                             ` liviu.dudau at arm.com
2016-11-14 11:26                             ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-14 11:26                             ` liviu.dudau
2016-11-18 10:17                             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 10:17                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 10:17                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 10:17                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 12:07                               ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:07                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:07                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:07                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:24                                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 12:24                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 12:24                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 12:24                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 12:53                                   ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:53                                     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:53                                     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 12:53                                     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 13:42                                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 13:42                                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 13:42                                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 16:18                                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 16:18                                         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 16:18                                         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 16:18                                         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 16:34                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 16:34                                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 16:34                                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 16:34                                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-18 17:03                                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 17:03                                             ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 17:03                                             ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-18 17:03                                             ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-23 14:16                                             ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 14:16                                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 14:16                                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 14:16                                               ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 15:22                                               ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-23 15:22                                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-23 15:22                                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-23 15:22                                                 ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-23 17:07                                                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 17:07                                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 17:07                                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 17:07                                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 23:23                                                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 23:23                                                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-23 23:23                                                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-24  9:12                                                     ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-24  9:12                                                       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-24  9:12                                                       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-24 10:24                                                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-24 10:24                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-24 10:24                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-24 10:24                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-25  8:46                                                     ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25  8:46                                                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25  8:46                                                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25  8:46                                                       ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25 12:03                                                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-25 12:03                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-25 12:03                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-25 12:03                                                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2016-11-25 16:27                                                         ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25 16:27                                                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25 16:27                                                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-25 16:27                                                           ` Gabriele Paoloni
2016-11-11 16:54                     ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 16:54                       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 16:54                       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-11 16:54                       ` zhichang.yuan
2016-11-14 11:06         ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-14 11:06           ` One Thousand Gnomes
2016-11-14 11:06           ` One Thousand Gnomes

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=58241286.1070107@hisilicon.com \
    --to=yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gabriele.paoloni@huawei.com \
    --cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
    --cc=kantyzc@163.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=liviu.dudau@arm.com \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=minyard@acm.org \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=xuwei5@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=zhichang.yuan02@gmail.com \
    --cc=zourongrong@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.