Re: [PATCH v2 15/17] PCI: dwc: Introduce dma-ranges property support for RC-host

[Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 01:10:53PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 10:26:23PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:50:42PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:41:35PM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:27:08PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 12:46:36AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> > > > > > In accordance with the generic PCIe Root Port DT-bindings the "dma-ranges"
> > > > > > property has the same format as the "ranges" property. The only difference
> > > > > > is in their semantics. The "dma-ranges" property describes the PCIe-to-CPU
> > > > > > memory mapping in opposite to the CPU-to-PCIe mapping of the "ranges"
> > > > > > property. Even though the DW PCIe controllers are normally equipped with
> > > > > > internal Address Translation Unit which inbound and outbound tables can be
> > > > > > used to implement both properties semantics, it was surprise for me to
> > > > > > discover that the host-related part of the DW PCIe driver currently
> > > > > > supports the "ranges" property only while the "dma-ranges" windows are
> > > > > > just ignored. Having the "dma-ranges" supported in the driver would be
> > > > > > very handy for the platforms, that don't tolerate the 1:1 CPU-PCIe memory
> > > > > > mapping and require customized the PCIe memory layout. So let's fix that
> > > > > > by introducing the "dma-ranges" property support.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > First of all we suggest to rename the dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu() method to
> > > > > > dw_pcie_prog_ep_inbound_atu() and create a new version of the
> > > > > > dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu() function. Thus we'll have two methods for RC
> > > > > > and EP controllers respectively in the same way as it has been developed
> > > > > > for the outbound ATU setup methods.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Secondly aside with the memory window index and type the new
> > > > > > dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu() function will accept CPU address, PCIe address
> > > > > > and size as its arguments. These parameters define the PCIe and CPU memory
> > > > > > ranges which will be used to setup the respective inbound ATU mapping. The
> > > > > > passed parameters need to be verified against the ATU ranges constraints
> > > > > > in the same way as it is done for the outbound ranges.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Finally the DMA-ranges detected for the PCIe controller need to be
> > > > > > converted into the inbound ATU entries during the host controller
> > > > > > initialization procedure. It will be done in the framework of the
> > > > > > dw_pcie_iatu_setup() method. Note before setting the inbound ranges up we
> > > > > > need to disable all the inbound ATU entries in order to prevent unexpected
> > > > > > PCIe TLPs translations defined by some third party software like
> > > > > > bootloader.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@baikalelectronics.ru>
> > > > > > ---
> > > > > >  .../pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c   |  4 +-
> > > > > >  .../pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c | 32 ++++++++++-
> > > > > >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c  | 57 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > > > > >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.h  |  6 +-
> > > > > >  4 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> > > > > > index c62640201246..9b0540cfa9e8 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> > > > > > @@ -167,8 +167,8 @@ static int dw_pcie_ep_inbound_atu(struct dw_pcie_ep *ep, u8 func_no, int type,
> > > > > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > -	ret = dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu(pci, func_no, free_win, type,
> > > > > > -				       cpu_addr, bar);
> > > > > > +	ret = dw_pcie_prog_ep_inbound_atu(pci, func_no, free_win, type,
> > > > > > +					  cpu_addr, bar);
> > > > > >  	if (ret < 0) {
> > > > > >  		dev_err(pci->dev, "Failed to program IB window\n");
> > > > > >  		return ret;
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > > index 7caca6c575a5..9cb406f5c185 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > > @@ -612,12 +612,15 @@ static int dw_pcie_iatu_setup(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > >  
> > > > > >  	/*
> > > > > > -	 * Ensure all outbound windows are disabled before proceeding with
> > > > > > -	 * the MEM/IO ranges setups.
> > > > > > +	 * Ensure all out/inbound windows are disabled before proceeding with
> > > > > > +	 * the MEM/IO (dma-)ranges setups.
> > > > > >  	 */
> > > > > >  	for (i = 0; i < pci->num_ob_windows; i++)
> > > > > >  		dw_pcie_disable_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_DIR_OB, i);
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > +	for (i = 0; i < pci->num_ib_windows; i++)
> > > > > > +		dw_pcie_disable_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_DIR_IB, i);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >  	i = 0;
> > > > > >  	resource_list_for_each_entry(entry, &pp->bridge->windows) {
> > > > > >  		if (resource_type(entry->res) != IORESOURCE_MEM)
> > > > > > @@ -654,9 +657,32 @@ static int dw_pcie_iatu_setup(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > >  
> > > > > >  	if (pci->num_ob_windows <= i)
> > > > > > -		dev_warn(pci->dev, "Resources exceed number of ATU entries (%d)\n",
> > > > > > +		dev_warn(pci->dev, "Ranges exceed outbound iATU size (%d)\n",
> > > > > >  			 pci->num_ob_windows);
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > +	i = 0;
> > > > > > +	resource_list_for_each_entry(entry, &pp->bridge->dma_ranges) {
> > > > > > +		if (resource_type(entry->res) != IORESOURCE_MEM)
> > > > > > +			continue;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +		if (pci->num_ib_windows <= i)
> > > > > > +			break;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +		ret = dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu(pci, i++, PCIE_ATU_TYPE_MEM,
> > > > > > +					       entry->res->start,
> > > > > > +					       entry->res->start - entry->offset,
> > > > > > +					       resource_size(entry->res));
> > > > > > +		if (ret) {
> > > > > > +			dev_err(pci->dev, "Failed to set DMA range %pr\n",
> > > > > > +				entry->res);
> > > > > > +			return ret;
> > > > > > +		}
> > > > > > +	}
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	if (pci->num_ib_windows <= i)
> > > > > > +		dev_warn(pci->dev, "Dma-ranges exceed inbound iATU size (%u)\n",
> > > > > > +			 pci->num_ib_windows);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >  	return 0;
> > > > > >  }
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > > > > > index 747e252c09e6..33718ed6c511 100644
> > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware.c
> > > > > > @@ -397,8 +397,61 @@ static inline void dw_pcie_writel_atu_ib(struct dw_pcie *pci, u32 index, u32 reg
> > > > > >  	dw_pcie_writel_atu(pci, PCIE_ATU_REGION_DIR_IB, index, reg, val);
> > > > > >  }
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > -int dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 func_no, int index,
> > > > > > -			     int type, u64 cpu_addr, u8 bar)
> > > > > > +int dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu(struct dw_pcie *pci, int index, int type,
> > > > > > +			     u64 cpu_addr, u64 pci_addr, u64 size)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +	u64 limit_addr = pci_addr + size - 1;
> > > > > > +	u32 retries, val;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +	if ((limit_addr & ~pci->region_limit) != (pci_addr & ~pci->region_limit) ||
> > > > > > +	    !IS_ALIGNED(cpu_addr, pci->region_align) ||
> > > > > > +	    !IS_ALIGNED(pci_addr, pci->region_align) ||
> > > > > > +	    !IS_ALIGNED(size, pci->region_align) ||
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > Why do you want the size to be aligned? What if I want to transfer a small size
> > > > > buffer?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Same question applies to outbound programming as well.
> > > > 
> > > > You can't program a region with the unaligned size by the DW PCIe CSRs
> > > > design. The limit address lower bits are read-only and fixed with
> > > > one's in accordance with the IP-core synthesize parameter
> > > > CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE. So the mapping is always performed in the
> > > > CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE chunks.
> > > > 
> > > > IATU_LIMIT_ADDR_OFF_{IN,OUT}BOUND.LIMIT_ADDR_HW = 
> > > > {(CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE == 65536) ? "0xffff" :
> > > >  (CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE == 32768) ? "0x7fff" :
> > > >  (CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE == 16384) ? "0x3fff" :
> > > >  (CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE == 8192)  ? "0x1fff" :
> > > >  (CX_ATU_MIN_REGION_SIZE == 4096)  ? "0xfff" : "0xffff"}
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > > Right. Even though the minimum size that could be mapped is 4k, I could still
> > > use that 4k size for mapping small buffers also. So you should not be erroring
> > > out here if the size is not aligned. 
> > 
> > Why would you need to do that? Even if you do and the operation
> > doesn't return an error (or at least splash the syslog with a
> > warning), the hardware would expand the mapping up to the aligned size
> > anyway. Such implicit behavior would have given your software an
> > impression that the mapping was performed in the way you asked with
> > the size you specified so the upper part of the unaligned range is
> > free to be used for something else. If the range is accessed, instead
> > of a bus error or silent IO termination it may cause unexpected result
> > of creating random PCIe bus traffic. So I'd rather have the
> > code/platform setup fixed right from the start instead of waiting for
> > the hard to find bug cause.
> > 
> 

> The application I'm working on is MHI bus. As per the design, it needs to copy
> 16byte data to ring buffers in the host memory. If I use iATU, then I
> cannot copy those small data with the size alignment.

First of all I don't see any driver using the DW PCIe iATU mapping
functions directly. They are only utilized in the framework of the
"ranges" and "dma-ranges" DT properties. If the application you are
referring to your private code, then it can't be a justification.
Secondly if your application uses them then what about just extending
the mapping range size while still access the lowest 15 bytes only? In
that case you would create a more comprehensive software which would
be aware of the hardware constraints.

> 
> > > I know that it is a waste of memory but that doesn't mean that it won't work.
> > 
> > The correct statement in this case would be "it won't work in a way
> > you expected, but with the implicit side effect applied to the memory
> > above the requested one."
> > 
> 

> Agree but that would only happen when the application does out of bound
> access and in that case the issue is with the application.

Not only in that case, but anyway how would such application be aware
of the out of bounds access? Returning an error in case if the
requested mapping can't be performed with the specified parameters is
a possible solution. So the application would be aware of the hardware
constraints and be sure it perceives them right. Otherwise the
consequences of the out of bounds access would be very unexpected
since the mapping is performed only for the small buffer.

-Sergey

> 
> Thanks,
> Mani
> 
> > -Sergey
> > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mani
> > > 
> > > > -Sergey
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Mani
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்