linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
To: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
Cc: "Jingoo Han" <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
	"Gustavo Pimentel" <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
	"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>,
	"Shradha Todi" <shradha.t@samsung.com>,
	"Pankaj Dubey" <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>,
	"Serge Semin" <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>,
	"Alexey Malahov" <Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru>,
	"Pavel Parkhomenko" <Pavel.Parkhomenko@baikalelectronics.ru>,
	"Frank Li" <Frank.Li@nxp.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] PCI: dwc: Set INCREASE_REGION_SIZE flag based on limit address
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 17:35:40 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220324120540.GE2854@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220324012524.16784-6-Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 04:25:16AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> It was wrong to use the region size parameter in order to determine
> whether the INCREASE_REGION_SIZE flag needs to be set for the outbound
> iATU entry because in general there are cases when combining a region base
> address and size together produces the out of bounds upper range limit
> while upper_32_bits(size) still returns zero. So having a region size
> within the permitted values doesn't mean the region limit address will fit
> to the corresponding CSR. Here is the way iATU calculates the in- and
> outbound untranslated regions if the INCREASE_REGION_SIZE flag is cleared
> [1]:
> 
>   Start address:                     End address:
> 63              31              0   63              31              0
> +---------------+---------------+   +---------------+---------------+
> |               |         |  0s |   |               |         |  Fs |
> +---------------+---------------+   +---------------+---------------+
>    upper base   |   lower base       !upper! base   | limit address
>      address          address           address
> 
> So the region start address is determined by the iATU lower and upper base
> address registers, while the region upper boundary is calculated based on
> the 32-bits limit address register and the upper part of the base address.
> In accordance with that logic for instance the range
> 0xf0000000 @ 0x20000000 does have the size smaller than 4GB, but the
> actual limit address turns to be invalid forming the untranslated address
> map as [0xf0000000; 0x0000FFFF], which isn't what the original range was.

I find the example confusing:

If the start address is 0x0-0xf0000000 and size is 0x20000000. Then the end
address without the INCREASE_REGION_SIZE is going to be:

0x0-0x1000FFFF and this is wrong.

If the INCREASE_REGION_SIZE is set, then the end address will be:

0x1-0x1000FFFF and this is correct.

> In order to fix that we need to check whether the size being added to the
> lower part of the base address causes the 4GB range overflow. If it does
> then we need to set the INCREASE_REGION_SIZE flag thus activating the
> extended limit address by means of an additional iATU CSR (upper limit
> address register) [2]:
> 
>   Start address:                     End address:
> 63              31              0   63      x       31              0
> +---------------+---------------+   +---------------+---------------+
> |               |         |  0s |   |       |       |         |  Fs |
> +---------------+---------------+   +---------------+---------------+
>   upper base   |   lower base         upper | upper | limit address
>     address          address          base  | limit |
>                                      address|address|
> 
> Otherwise there is enough room in the 32-bits wide limit address register,
> and the flag can be left unset.
> 
> Note the case when the size-based flag setting approach is correct implies
> requiring to have the size-aligned base addresses only. But that
> restriction isn't relevant to the PCIe ranges accepted by the kernel.
> There is also no point in implementing it either seeing the problem can be
> easily fixed by checking the whole limit address instead of the region
> size.
> 
> [1] DesignWare Cores PCI Express Controller Databook - DWC PCIe Root Port,
>     v5.40a, March 2019, fig.3-36, p.175
> [2] DesignWare Cores PCI Express Controller Databook - DWC PCIe Root Port,
>     v5.40a, March 2019, fig.3-37, p.176
> 
> Fixes: 5b4cf0f65324 ("PCI: dwc: Add upper limit address for outbound iATU")
> Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>

With the example fixed,

Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>

Thanks,
Mani

> ---
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c | 16 ++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> index 7dc8c360a0d4..d737af058903 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> @@ -287,8 +287,8 @@ static void dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 func_no,
>  	dw_pcie_writel_ob_unroll(pci, index, PCIE_ATU_UNR_UPPER_TARGET,
>  				 upper_32_bits(pci_addr));
>  	val = type | PCIE_ATU_FUNC_NUM(func_no);
> -	val = upper_32_bits(size - 1) ?
> -		val | PCIE_ATU_INCREASE_REGION_SIZE : val;
> +	if (upper_32_bits(limit_addr) > upper_32_bits(cpu_addr))
> +		val |= PCIE_ATU_INCREASE_REGION_SIZE;
>  	if (pci->version == 0x490A)
>  		val = dw_pcie_enable_ecrc(val);
>  	dw_pcie_writel_ob_unroll(pci, index, PCIE_ATU_UNR_REGION_CTRL1, val);
> @@ -315,6 +315,7 @@ static void __dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 func_no,
>  					u64 pci_addr, u64 size)
>  {
>  	u32 retries, val;
> +	u64 limit_addr;
>  
>  	if (pci->ops && pci->ops->cpu_addr_fixup)
>  		cpu_addr = pci->ops->cpu_addr_fixup(pci, cpu_addr);
> @@ -325,6 +326,8 @@ static void __dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 func_no,
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
> +	limit_addr = cpu_addr + size - 1;
> +
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_VIEWPORT,
>  			   PCIE_ATU_REGION_OUTBOUND | index);
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_LOWER_BASE,
> @@ -332,17 +335,18 @@ static void __dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 func_no,
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_UPPER_BASE,
>  			   upper_32_bits(cpu_addr));
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_LIMIT,
> -			   lower_32_bits(cpu_addr + size - 1));
> +			   lower_32_bits(limit_addr));
>  	if (pci->version >= 0x460A)
>  		dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_UPPER_LIMIT,
> -				   upper_32_bits(cpu_addr + size - 1));
> +				   upper_32_bits(limit_addr));
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_LOWER_TARGET,
>  			   lower_32_bits(pci_addr));
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_UPPER_TARGET,
>  			   upper_32_bits(pci_addr));
>  	val = type | PCIE_ATU_FUNC_NUM(func_no);
> -	val = ((upper_32_bits(size - 1)) && (pci->version >= 0x460A)) ?
> -		val | PCIE_ATU_INCREASE_REGION_SIZE : val;
> +	if (upper_32_bits(limit_addr) > upper_32_bits(cpu_addr) &&
> +	    pci->version >= 0x460A)
> +		val |= PCIE_ATU_INCREASE_REGION_SIZE;
>  	if (pci->version == 0x490A)
>  		val = dw_pcie_enable_ecrc(val);
>  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_ATU_CR1, val);
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-24 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-24  1:25 [PATCH 00/12] PCI: dwc: Various fixes and cleanups Serge Semin
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 01/12] PCI: dwc: Stop link in the host init error and de-initialization Serge Semin
2022-03-24  8:11   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 02/12] PCI: dwc: Don't use generic IO-ops for DBI-space access Serge Semin
2022-03-24  8:27   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-04-13 21:03     ` Serge Semin
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 03/12] PCI: dwc: Add unroll iATU space support to the regions disable method Serge Semin
2022-03-24  8:59   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-28 21:34   ` kernel test robot
2022-03-28 21:34   ` kernel test robot
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 04/12] PCI: dwc: Disable outbound windows for controllers with iATU Serge Semin
2022-03-24  9:05   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 05/12] PCI: dwc: Set INCREASE_REGION_SIZE flag based on limit address Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:05   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam [this message]
2022-04-13 21:54     ` Serge Semin
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 06/12] PCI: dwc: Add braces to the multi-line if-else statements Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:13   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 07/12] PCI: dwc: Add trailing new-line literals to the log messages Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:16   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 08/12] PCI: dwc: Discard IP-core version checking on unrolled iATU detection Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:19   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 09/12] PCI: dwc: Convert Link-up status method to using dw_pcie_readl_dbi() Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:20   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 10/12] PCI: dwc-plat: Simplify the probe method return value handling Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:23   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 11/12] PCI: dwc-plat: Discard unused regmap pointer Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:24   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2022-03-24  1:25 ` [PATCH 12/12] PCI: dwc-plat: Drop dw_plat_pcie_of_match forward declaration Serge Semin
2022-03-24 12:26   ` Manivannan Sadhasivam

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=20220324120540.GE2854@thinkpad \
    --to=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=Alexey.Malahov@baikalelectronics.ru \
    --cc=Frank.Li@nxp.com \
    --cc=Pavel.Parkhomenko@baikalelectronics.ru \
    --cc=Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=fancer.lancer@gmail.com \
    --cc=gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com \
    --cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
    --cc=kw@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=pankaj.dubey@samsung.com \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=shradha.t@samsung.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).