From: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
To: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
robin.murphy@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/3] PCI: rcar: Do not abort on too many inbound dma-ranges
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 17:18:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191016161846.GC7457@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <75fb3519-80eb-fec2-d3eb-cc1b884fef25@gmail.com>
[+RobH, Robin]
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 05:29:50PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
[...]
> >> The firmware provides all the ranges which are available and usable,
> >> that's the hardware description and that should be in the DT.
> >
> > If the HW (given that those dma-ranges are declared for the PCI host
> > controller) can't be programmed to enable those DMA ranges - those
> > ranges are neither available nor usable, ergo DT is broken.
>
> The hardware can be programmed to enable those DMA ranges, just not all
> of them at the same time.
Ok, we are down to DT bindings interpretation then.
> It's not the job of the bootloader to guess which ranges might the next
> stage like best.
By the time this series:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/user/todo/linux-pci/?series=132419
is merged, your policy will require the host controller driver to
remove the DMA ranges that could not be programmed in the inbound
address decoders from the dma_ranges list, otherwise things will
fall apart.
> >> The firmware cannot decide the policy for the next stage (Linux in
> >> this case) on which ranges are better to use for Linux and which are
> >> less good. Linux can then decide which ranges are best suited for it
> >> and ignore the other ones.
> >
> > dma-ranges is a property that is used by other kernel subsystems eg
> > IOMMU other than the RCAR host controller driver. The policy, provided
> > there is one should be shared across them. You can't leave a PCI
> > host controller half-programmed and expect other subsystems (that
> > *expect* those ranges to be DMA'ble) to work.
> >
> > I reiterate my point: if firmware is broken it is better to fail
> > the probe rather than limp on hoping that things will keep on
> > working.
>
> But the firmware is not broken ?
See above, it depends on how the dma-ranges property is interpreted,
hopefully we can reach consensus in this thread, I won't merge a patch
that can backfire later unless we all agree that what it does is
correct.
Lorenzo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-16 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-09 17:57 [PATCH V3 1/3] PCI: rcar: Move the inbound index check marek.vasut
2019-08-09 17:57 ` [PATCH V3 2/3] PCI: rcar: Do not abort on too many inbound dma-ranges marek.vasut
2019-08-16 13:23 ` Simon Horman
2019-08-16 13:28 ` Marek Vasut
2019-08-16 13:38 ` Simon Horman
2019-08-16 17:41 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21 10:18 ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-26 18:03 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-26 20:36 ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-26 21:06 ` Andrew Murray
2019-11-06 23:37 ` Marek Vasut
2019-11-07 14:19 ` Andrew Murray
2019-11-16 15:48 ` Marek Vasut
2019-11-18 18:42 ` Robin Murphy
2019-12-22 7:46 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 15:00 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-16 15:10 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 15:26 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-16 15:29 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 16:18 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi [this message]
2019-10-16 18:12 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-16 18:17 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 20:25 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-16 21:15 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-16 22:26 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-16 22:33 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17 7:06 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-17 10:55 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17 13:06 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-17 14:00 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-17 14:36 ` Rob Herring
2019-10-17 15:01 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 9:53 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-18 12:22 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 12:53 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 14:26 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 15:44 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 16:44 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-18 17:35 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 18:44 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21 8:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-11-19 12:10 ` Robin Murphy
2019-10-18 10:06 ` Andrew Murray
2019-10-18 10:17 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-10-18 11:40 ` Andrew Murray
2019-08-09 17:57 ` [PATCH V3 3/3] PCI: rcar: Recalculate inbound range alignment for each controller entry marek.vasut
2019-10-21 10:39 ` Andrew Murray
2019-08-16 10:52 ` [PATCH V3 1/3] PCI: rcar: Move the inbound index check Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-08-16 10:59 ` Marek Vasut
2019-08-16 11:10 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2019-10-15 20:14 ` Marek Vasut
2019-10-21 10:11 ` Andrew Murray
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=20191016161846.GC7457@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com \
--to=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marek.vasut@gmail.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/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).