lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Mar]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V7 0/7] LPC: legacy ISA I/O support
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 3:42 AM, zhichang.yuan
<yuanzhichang@hisilicon.com> wrote:
> This patchset supports the IPMI-bt device attached to the Low-Pin-Count
> interface implemented on Hisilicon Hip06/Hip07 SoC.
> -----------
> | LPC host|
> | |
> -----------
> |
> _____________V_______________LPC
> | |
> V V
> ------------
> | BT(ipmi)|
> ------------
>
> When master accesses those peripherals beneath the Hip06/Hip07 LPC, a specific
> LPC driver is needed to make LPC host generate the standard LPC I/O cycles with
> the target peripherals'I/O port addresses. But on curent arm64 world, there is
> no real I/O accesses. All the I/O operations through in/out pair are based on
> MMIO which is not satisfied the I/O mechanism on Hip06/Hip07 LPC.
> To solve this issue and keep the relevant existing peripherals' driver
> untouched, this patchset implements:
> - introduces a generic I/O space management framwork, LIBIO, to support I/O
> operations of both MMIO buses and the host controllers which access their
> peripherals with host local I/O addresses;
> - redefines the in/out accessors to provide unified interfaces for MMIO and
> legacy I/O. Based on the LIBIO, the calling of in/out() from upper-layer
> drivers, such as ipmi-si, will be redirected to the corresponding
> device-specific I/O hooks to perfrom the I/O accesses.
> Based on this patch-set, all the I/O accesses to Hip06/Hip07 LPC peripherals
> can be supported without any changes on the existing ipmi-si driver.

Thanks for reposting this. I have a few high-level comments first, based on
the walk through the code I did with Gabriele and John last week:

- I think the libio framework is more generic than it needs to be, but as
Alex really liked it this way and it was done like this based on his earlier
comments, I think that's ok.

- after we went back and forth on the ACPI implementation, we concluded
that it is correct to do the same as on DT and completely abstract the
number space for I/O ports. No code should rely on a Linux port number
to have any particular relation to the physical address or the the address
on a PCI or LPC bus.

- The name "libio" still needs to be changed, this is way too generic, as
"I/O" can refer to many things in the kernel, and almost none of them
are related to x86 programmed I/O ports in any way. My suggestion
would be "generic_ioport", or possibly "libioport", "libpio" or "pci_io". Any
of them would work for me, or someone else could come up with a better
name that describes what it is.

- I'm pretty sure the current implementation is broken for the ioport_map
function that tries to turn an IORESOURCE_IO number into a pointer.
Forcing CONFIG_GENERIC_IOMAP on would solve this, but also
make all MMIO operations slower, which we probably don't want.
It's probably enough to add a check in ioport_map() to see if the range
is mapped into a virtual address or not.

- We could simplify the lookup a bit by using the trick from arch/ia64
of using an array instead of linked list for walking the port numbers.
There, the upper bits of the port number refer to an address space
number while the lower bits refer to the bus address within that
address space. This should work just as well as the current
implementation but would be a little easier to understand. Maybe
Bjorn can comment on this too, as I think he was involved with the
ia64 implementation.

Arnd

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-03-14 09:39    [W:0.157 / U:8.532 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site