linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stefan Roese <sr@denx.de>
To: "Pali Rohár" <pali@kernel.org>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>
Cc: "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
	"Russell King" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	"Andrew Lunn" <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	"Sebastian Hesselbarth" <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>,
	"Gregory Clement" <gregory.clement@bootlin.com>,
	"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	"Marek Behún" <kabel@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Marvell: Update PCIe fixup
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 18:03:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aa580000-b4c6-2590-6196-48c10998320a@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211102154831.xtrlgrmrizl5eidl@pali>

On 02.11.21 16:48, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 November 2021 15:49:29 Pali Rohár wrote:
>> On Tuesday 02 November 2021 14:01:41 Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
>>> On Tue, 2 Nov 2021, Pali Rohár wrote:
>>>
>>>>>   None of the Galileo system controllers I came across had the class code
>>>>> set incorrectly.
>>>>
>>>> In kernel there is quirk only for one device with id:
>>>> PCI_VENDOR_ID_MARVELL (0x11ab) PCI_DEVICE_ID_MARVELL_GT64111 (0x4146)
>>>>
>>>> So for some reasons quirk is needed... Anyway, patch for this quirk just
>>>> adds comment as there is no explanation for it. It does not modify quirk
>>>> code.
>>>>
>>>> So it is possible that Marvell (or rather Galileo at that time) included
>>>> some config space fixup in some products and 0x4146 did not have it.
>>>> Just guessing... We can really only guess what could happen at that time
>>>> 20 years ago...
>>>
>>>   Ah, there you go! -- sadly I don't seem to have a copy of the datasheet
>>> for the GT-64111, but the GT-64115 has it[1]:
>>>
>>> Table 158: PCI Class Code and Revision ID, Offset: 0x008
>>>   Bits  Field name Function                                     Initial Value
>>>   7:0   RevID      Indicates the GT-64115 PCI Revision          0x01
>>>                    number.
>>>   15:8  Reserved   Read only.                                   0x0
>>>   23:16 SubClass   Indicates the GT-64115 Subclass - Mem-       0x80
>>>                    ory controller.
>>>   31:24 BaseClass  Indicates the GT-64115 Base Class -          0x05
>>>                    memory controller.
>>>
>>> and then:
>>>
>>> "Device and Vendor ID (0x000), Class Code and Revision ID (0x008), and
>>> Header Type (0x00e) fields are read only from the PCI bus.  These fields
>>> can be modified and read via the CPU bus."
>>>
>>> Likewise with the GT-64120[2]:
>>>
>>> Table 208: PCI_0 Class Code and Revision ID, Offset: 0x008 from PCI_0 or CPU; 0x088 from
>>>             PCI_1
>>>   Bits  Field name Function                                      Initial Value
>>>   7:0   RevID      Indicates the GT-64120 PCI_0 revision number. 0x02
>>>   15:8  Reserved   Read Only 0.                                  0x0
>>>   23:16 SubClass   Indicates the GT-64120 Subclass               Depends on value
>>>                    0x00 - Host Bridge Device.                    sampled at reset
>>>                    0x80 - Memory Device.                         on BankSel[0]. See
>>>                                                                  Table 44 on page
>>>                                                                  11-1.
>>>   31:24 BaseClass  Indicates the GT-64120 Base Class             Depends on value
>>>                    0x06 - Bridge Device.                         sampled at reset
>>>                    0x05 - Memory Device.                         on BankSel[0]. See
>>>                                                                  Table 44 on page
>>>                                                                  11-1.
>>>
>>> Table 209: PCI_1 Class Code and Revision ID, Offset: 0x088 from PCI_0 or CPU; 0x008 from
>>>             PCI_1
>>>   Bits  Field name Function                                      Initial Value
>>>   31:0  Various    Same as for PCI_0 Class Code and Revision ID.
>>>
>>> and then also:
>>>
>>> "Device and Vendor ID (0x000), Class Code and Revision ID (0x008), and
>>> Header Type (0x00e) fields are read only from the PCI bus.  These fields
>>> can be modified and read via the CPU bus."
>>>
>>> -- so this is system-specific and an intended chip feature rather than an
>>> erratum (or rather it is a system erratum if the reset strap or the boot
>>> firmware has got it wrong).
>>>
>>>   The memory device class code is IIUC meant to be typically chosen when
>>> the Galileo/Marvell device is used without the CPU interface, i.e. as a
>>> PCI memory controller device only[3].
> 
> I have found on internet some copy of GT64111 datasheet ("GT-64111
> System Controller for RC4640, RM523X and VR4300 CPUs", Galileo
> Technology, Product Preview Revision 1.1, FEB 4, 1999) and in section
> "17.15 PCI Configuration Registers" there is subsection "Class Code and
> Revision ID, Offset: 0x008" with content:
> 
> Bits  Field name Function                                           Initial Value
> 7:0   RevID      Indicates the GT-64111 Revision number.            0x10
>                   GT-64111-P-0 = 0x10
> 15:8  Reserved                                                      0x0
> 23:16 SubClass   Indicates the GT-64111 Subclass (0x80 - other mem- 0x80
>                   ory controller)
> 31:24 BaseClass  Indicates the GT-64111 Base Class (0x5 - memory    0x05
>                   controller).
> 
> And in section "6.5.3 PCI Autoconfiguration at RESET" is following
> interesting information:
> 
> Eight PCI registers can be automatically loaded after Rst*.
> Autoconfiguration mode is enabled by asserting the DMAReq[3]* LOW on
> Rst*. Any PCI transactions targeted for the GT-64111 will be retried
> while the loading of the PCI configuration registers is in process.
> 
> It is highly recommended that all PC applications utilize the PCI
> Autoconfiguration at RESET feature. The autoload feature can be easily
> implemented with a very low cost EPLD. Galileo provides sample EPLD
> equations upon request. (You can always pull the EPLD off your final
> product if you find there are no issues during testing.)
> 
> NOTE: The GT-64111’s default Class Code is 0x0580 (Memory Controller)
> which is a change from the GT-64011.
> 
> The GT-64011 used the Class Code 0x0600 which denotes Host Bridge. Some
> PCs refuse to configure host bridges if they are found plugged into a
> PCI slot (ask the BIOS vendors why...). The “Memory Controller” Class
> Code does not cause a problem for these non-compliant BIOSes, so we used
> this as the default in the GT-64111. The Class Code can be reporgrammed
> in both devices via autoload or CPU register writes.
> 
> The PCI register values are loaded from the ROM controlled by BootCS*
> are shown in Table 21, below.
> 
> TABLE 21. PCI Registers Loaded at RESET
> Register                        Offset Boot Device Address
> Device and Vendor ID            0x000  0x1fffffe0
> Class Code and Revision ID      0x008  0x1fffffe4
> Subsystem Device and Vendor ID  0x02c  0x1fffffe8
> Interrupt Pin and Line          0x03c  0x1fffffec
> RAS[1:0]* Bank Size             0xc08  0x1ffffff0
> RAS[3:2]* Bank Size             0xc0c  0x1ffffff4
> CS[2:0]* Bank Size              0xc10  0x1ffffff8
> CS[3]* & Boot CS* Bank Size     0xc14  0x1ffffffc
> 
> ===
> 
> So the conclusion is that there is also some RESET configuration via
> BootCS (I have no idea what it is or was). And default value (when RESET
> configuration is not used) is always "Memory controller" due to
> existence of "broken PC BIOSes" (probably x86).
> 
> Hence the quirk for GT64111 in kernel is always needed. And Thomas
> already confirmed in his pci hexdump that PCI Class code is set to
> Memory Controller.
> 
> I hope that now this mystery of this GT64111 quirk is solved :-) I will
> update patch with correct comment, why quirk is needed.
> 
> So due to the fact that 20 years ago there were broken x86 BIOSes which
> did not like PCI devices with PCI Class code of Host Bridge, Marvell
> changed default PCI Class code to Memory Controller and let it in this
> state also for future PCIe-based ARM and AR64 SoCs for next 20 years.
> Which generally leaded to broken PCIe support in mvebu SoCs. I have no
> more comments about it... :-(

If this is really the case, that all this was "copied" in such a bad
design state into newer SoC's for that many years, which I don't doubt
right now any more, then this is absolutely amazing and pretty sad IMHO.

Pali, many thanks for being persistant enough to dig through this.

Thanks,
Stefan

  reply	other threads:[~2021-11-02 17:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-11-01 15:04 [PATCH] PCI: Marvell: Update PCIe fixup Pali Rohár
2021-11-01 16:27 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-01 17:56   ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-01 18:03     ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-11-02  8:42 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-11-02  9:02   ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02  9:47     ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-11-02 10:00       ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02 12:35         ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-11-02 12:58           ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02 14:01             ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-11-02 14:49               ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02 15:48                 ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02 17:03                   ` Stefan Roese [this message]
2021-11-03 14:59                   ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-11-03 14:49                 ` Maciej W. Rozycki
2021-11-03 15:03                   ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-02 15:02         ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-11-02 15:13           ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-09 23:42             ` Pali Rohár
2021-11-10  8:55               ` Thomas Bogendoerfer
2021-11-02 17:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ARM: " Pali Rohár
2021-11-09 22:53   ` Pali Rohár
2022-05-14 18:21     ` Pali Rohár
2022-07-07 18:31       ` Pali Rohár
2022-07-07 19:22         ` Russell King (Oracle)
2022-02-19 14:30   ` Pali Rohár
2022-07-18 10:34     ` Gregory CLEMENT

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=aa580000-b4c6-2590-6196-48c10998320a@denx.de \
    --to=sr@denx.de \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=gregory.clement@bootlin.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kabel@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=macro@orcam.me.uk \
    --cc=pali@kernel.org \
    --cc=sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com \
    --cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.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).