lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
SubjectRe: PCIe MSI address is not written at pci_enable_msi_range call
From
Date
On 12/07/16 10:11, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>> Subject: Re: PCIe MSI address is not written at pci_enable_msi_range call
>>
>> On 11/07/16 11:51, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
>>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the reply.
>>>>>
>>>>> From PCIe Spec:
>>>>> MSI Enable Bit:
>>>>> If 1 and the MSI-X Enable bit in the MSI-X Message Control register
>>>>> (see Section 6.8.2.3) is 0, the function is permitted to use MSI to
>>>>> request service and is prohibited from using its INTx# pin.
>>>>>
>>>>> From Endpoint perspective, MSI Enable = 1 indicates MSI can be used
>>>> which means MSI address and data fields are available/programmed.
>>>>>
>>>>> In our SoC whenever MSI Enable goes from 0 --> 1 the hardware
>>>>> latches
>>>> onto MSI address and MSI data values.
>>>>>
>>>>> With current MSI implementation in kernel, our SoC is latching on to
>>>> incorrect address and data values, as address/data
>>>>> are updated much later than MSI Enable bit.
>>>>
>>>> Interesting. It looks like we're doing something wrong in the MSI flow.
>>>> Can you confirm that this is limited to MSI and doesn't affect MSI-X?
>>>>
>>> I think it's the same issue irrespective of MSI or MSI-X as we are
>>> enabling these interrupts before providing the vectors.
>>>
>>> So we always have a hole when MSI/MSI-X is 1, and software driver has
>>> not registered the irq, and End Point may raise an interrupt (may be
>>> due to error) in this point of time.
>>
>> Looking at the MSI-X part of the code, there is this:
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci
>> /msi.c#n764
>>
>> which hints that it may not be possible to do otherwise. Damned if you do,
>> damned if you don't.
>>
> MSI-X might not have problem then, how to resolve the issue with MSI ?

Can you give this patch a go and let me know if that works for you?

diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
index a080f44..565e2a4 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
@@ -1277,6 +1277,8 @@ struct irq_domain *pci_msi_create_irq_domain(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
if (info->flags & MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS)
pci_msi_domain_update_chip_ops(info);

+ info->flags |= MSI_FLAG_ACTIVATE_EARLY;
+
domain = msi_create_irq_domain(fwnode, info, parent);
if (!domain)
return NULL;
diff --git a/include/linux/msi.h b/include/linux/msi.h
index 8b425c6..513b7c7 100644
--- a/include/linux/msi.h
+++ b/include/linux/msi.h
@@ -270,6 +270,8 @@ enum {
MSI_FLAG_MULTI_PCI_MSI = (1 << 3),
/* Support PCI MSIX interrupts */
MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX = (1 << 4),
+ /* Needs early activate, required for PCI */
+ MSI_FLAG_ACTIVATE_EARLY = (1 << 5),
};

int msi_domain_set_affinity(struct irq_data *data, const struct cpumask *mask,
diff --git a/kernel/irq/msi.c b/kernel/irq/msi.c
index 38e89ce..4ed2cca 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/msi.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/msi.c
@@ -361,6 +361,13 @@ int msi_domain_alloc_irqs(struct irq_domain *domain, struct device *dev,
else
dev_dbg(dev, "irq [%d-%d] for MSI\n",
virq, virq + desc->nvec_used - 1);
+
+ if (info->flags & MSI_FLAG_ACTIVATE_EARLY) {
+ struct irq_data *irq_data;
+
+ irq_data = irq_domain_get_irq_data(domain, desc->irq);
+ irq_domain_activate_irq(irq_data);
+ }
}

return 0;

Thanks,

M.

--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-07-12 17:21    [W:0.186 / U:0.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site