From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3CE2C4727E for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:02:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A857206FC for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:02:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1601478134; bh=MdE1i8KgB3QnwXcjilTU0w0symDifwqpaU/PORoVu5I=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=wcCE5uRo16p080xNowIshE7Bz6zrVgvkL1XSgsADfPbEI24VDYSrIVbsXREUzlTu8 mPmluOhXh+DqeTlRR/eY7SRrrqvNtxmHOyUjZRqyXKkwD61+u2dsJIPJ1yseUUsqIt wdLb/VM3hBCLw55S6keFBLv5UPVYW+yGlSlp5ESQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728232AbgI3PCN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:02:13 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:57674 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725872AbgI3PCN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:02:13 -0400 Received: from mail-oi1-f180.google.com (mail-oi1-f180.google.com [209.85.167.180]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0EE2920789; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:02:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1601478132; bh=MdE1i8KgB3QnwXcjilTU0w0symDifwqpaU/PORoVu5I=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=FolePRkIR98oqR+FMUde+BLZiLt3IVCR4Cn3rd8ymzuvFEg3vAfWdViIMcnz0FnKC X0UvJyZ131W481CJsVWVIdORGvVd+ZmgM8deQvU+OCTVSSZWSGJqDw0VhjtieB3XB6 eOWzS6qGAr1MyAnPrkhNVsNrT4p5+SX5nKPEvYeY= Received: by mail-oi1-f180.google.com with SMTP id 185so1988831oie.11; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:02:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530TfWqAWulx87rU7fHKKozKFYPd5H3RMn8JoZh2E7HUp1/5y7dW gKy80ua8o+zbyatKlo1db8V5duXkFh0jx4yIzg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGWMQf9BR7BPtzdlH19vuVhLB7nPfhp5mLIHpIIUIFAco8YDsbqZom1mvT7pQuhqCygZo++TAN9SGz8m3PAfY= X-Received: by 2002:aca:7543:: with SMTP id q64mr1661890oic.147.1601478131261; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:02:11 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200916054130.8685-1-Zhiqiang.Hou@nxp.com> <20200928093911.GB12010@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <9ac53f04-f2e8-c5f9-e1f7-e54270ec55a0@ti.com> In-Reply-To: <9ac53f04-f2e8-c5f9-e1f7-e54270ec55a0@ti.com> From: Rob Herring Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 10:01:59 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: Added link up check in map_bus of dw_child_pcie_ops To: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Cc: Gustavo Pimentel , "Z.q. Hou" , Lorenzo Pieralisi , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , PCI , Bjorn Helgaas , Michael Walle , Ard Biesheuvel Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 8:22 AM Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrot= e: > > Hi, > > On 29/09/20 10:41 pm, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 10:24 AM Gustavo Pimentel > > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 5:5:41, Z.q. Hou wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Lorenzo, > >>> > >>> Thanks a lot for your comments! > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Lorenzo Pieralisi > >>>> Sent: 2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=8828=E6=97=A5 17:39 > >>>> To: Z.q. Hou > >>>> Cc: Rob Herring ; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; PCI > >>>> ; Bjorn Helgaas ; > >>>> Gustavo Pimentel ; Michael Walle > >>>> ; Ard Biesheuvel > >>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: Added link up check in map_bus of > >>>> dw_child_pcie_ops > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 04:24:47AM +0000, Z.q. Hou wrote: > >>>>> Hi Rob, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks a lot for your comments! > >>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Rob Herring > >>>>>> Sent: 2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=8818=E6=97=A5 23:28 > >>>>>> To: Z.q. Hou > >>>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; PCI ; > >>>>>> Lorenzo Pieralisi ; Bjorn Helgaas > >>>>>> ; Gustavo Pimentel > >>>>>> ; Michael Walle > >>>> ; > >>>>>> Ard Biesheuvel > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: Added link up check in map_bus of > >>>>>> dw_child_pcie_ops > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 5:02 AM Z.q. Hou > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Rob, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks a lot for your comments! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>>>> From: Rob Herring > >>>>>>>> Sent: 2020=E5=B9=B49=E6=9C=8817=E6=97=A5 4:29 > >>>>>>>> To: Z.q. Hou > >>>>>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; PCI > >>>>>>>> ; Lorenzo Pieralisi > >>>>>>>> ; Bjorn Helgaas > >>>>>>>> ; Gustavo Pimentel > >>>>>>>> ; Michael Walle > >>>>>> ; > >>>>>>>> Ard Biesheuvel > >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: Added link up check in map_bus of > >>>>>>>> dw_child_pcie_ops > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 11:49 PM Zhiqiang Hou > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> From: Hou Zhiqiang > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On NXP Layerscape platforms, it results in SError in the > >>>>>>>>> enumeration of the PCIe controller, which is not connecting > >>>>>>>>> with an Endpoint device. And it doesn't make sense to > >>>>>>>>> enumerate the Endpoints when the PCIe link is down. So this > >>>>>>>>> patch added the link up check to avoid to fire configuration > >>>> transactions on link down bus. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Michael reported the same issue as well. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> What happens if the link goes down between the check and the > >>>> access? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This patch cannot cover this case, and will get the SError. > >>>>>>> But I think it makes sense to avoid firing transactions on link d= own bus. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That's impossible to do without a race even in h/w. > >>>>> > >>>>> Agree. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It's a racy check. I'd like to find an alternative solution. > >>>>>>>> It's even worse if Layerscape is used in ECAM mode. I looked at > >>>>>>>> the EDK2 setup for layerscape[1] and it looks like root ports > >>>>>>>> are just skipped if link > >>>>>> is down. > >>>>>>>> Maybe a link down just never happens once up, but if so, then we > >>>>>>>> only need to check it once and fail probe. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Many customers connect the FPGA Endpoint, which may establish PCI= e > >>>>>>> link after the PCIe enumeration and then rescan the PCIe bus, so = I > >>>>>>> think it should not exit the probe of root port even if there is > >>>>>>> not link up > >>>>>> during enumeration. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That's a good reason. I want to unify the behavior here as it vari= es > >>>>>> per platform currently and wasn't sure which way to go. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> I've dug into this a bit more and am curious about the > >>>>>>>> PCIE_ABSERR register setting which is set to: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> #define PCIE_ABSERR_SETTING 0x9401 /* Forward error of > >>>>>>>> non-posted request */ > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> It seems to me this is not what we want at least for config > >>>>>>>> accesses, but commit 84d897d6993 where this was added seems to > >>>>>>>> say otherwise. Is it not possible to configure the response per = access > >>>> type? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks a lot for your investigation! > >>>>>>> The story is like this: Some customers worry about these silent > >>>>>>> error (DWC PCIe IP won't forward the error of outbound non-post > >>>>>>> request by default), so we were pushed to enable the error > >>>>>>> forwarding to AXI in the commit > >>>>>>> 84d897d6993 as you saw. But it cannot differentiate the config > >>>>>>> transactions from the MEM_rd, except the Vendor ID access, which > >>>>>>> is controlled by a separate bit and it was set to not forward > >>>>>>> error of access > >>>>>> of Vendor ID. > >>>>>>> So we think it's okay to enable the error forwarding, the SError > >>>>>>> should not occur, because after the enumeration it won't access > >>>>>>> the > >>>>>> non-existent functions. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We've rejected upstream support for platforms aborting on config > >>>>>> accesses[1]. I think there's clear consensus that aborting is the > >>>>>> wrong behavior. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Do MEM_wr errors get forwarded? Seems like that would be enough. > >>>>>> Also, wouldn't page faults catch most OOB accesses anyways? You ne= ed > >>>>>> things page aligned anyways with an IOMMU and doing userspace acce= ss > >>>>>> or guest assignment. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes, errors of MEM_wr can be forwarded. > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Here's another idea, how about only enabling forwarding errors if > >>>>>> the link is up? If really would need to be configured any time the > >>>>>> link state changes rather than just at probe. I'm not sure if you > >>>>>> have a way to disable it on link down though. > >>>>> > >>>>> Dug deeper into this issue and found the setting of not forwarding > >>>>> error of non-existent Vender ID access counts on the link partner: = 1. > >>>>> When there is a link partner (namely link up), it will return 0xfff= f > >>>>> when read non-existent function Vendor ID and won't forward error t= o > >>>>> AXI. 2. When no link partner (link down), it will forward the erro= r > >>>>> of reading non-existent function Vendor ID to AXI and result in > >>>>> SError. > >>>>> > >>>>> I think this is a DWC PCIe IP specific issue but not get feedback f= rom > >>>>> design team. I'm thinking to disable this error forwarding just li= ke > >>>>> other platforms, since when these errors (UR, CA and CT) are detect= ed, > >>>>> AER driver can also report the error and try to recover. > >>>> > >>>> I take this as you shall send a patch to fix this issue shortly, is = this correct ? > >>> > >>> The issue becomes complex: > >>> I reviewed the DWC PCIe databook of verion 4.40a which is used on Lay= erscape platforms, and it said that " Your RC application should not genera= te CFG requests until it has confirmed that the link is up by sampling the = smlh_link_up and rmlh_link_up outputs". > >>> So, the link up checking should not be remove before each outbound CF= G access. > >>> Gustavo, can you share more details on the link up checking? Does it = only exist in the 4.40a? > >> > >> Hi Zhiqiang, > >> > >> According to the information that I got from the IP team you are corre= ct, > >> the same requirement still exists on the newer IP versions. > > > > How is that possible in a race free way? > > > > Testing on meson and layerscape (with the forwarding of errors > > disabled) shows a link check is not needed. But then dra7xx seems to > > need one (or has some f/w setup). > > Yeah, I don't see any registers in the DRA7x PCIe wrapper for disabling > error forwarding. It's a DWC port logic register AFAICT, but perhaps not present in all versi= ons. Rob