Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Jan 2023 19:33:51 +0900 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] PCI: endpoint: support an alignment aware map/unmaping | From | Shunsuke Mie <> |
| |
On 2023/01/18 5:41, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 06:03:48PM +0900, Shunsuke Mie wrote: >> Add an align_mem operation to the EPC ops, which function is used to >> pci_epc_map/unmap_addr(). These change to enable mapping for any alignment >> restriction of EPC. The map function maps an aligned memory to include a >> requested memory region. > I think this does two things: 1) add the .align_mem() function > pointer, and 2) move the pci_epc_mem_alloc_addr() call into > pci_epc_map_addr(). For 2), I would expect to see > pci_epc_mem_alloc_addr() being *removed* from somewhere else. > > Anyway, both are significant and should be mentioned in the commit > log. Possibly they could even be separate commits: move the > alloc/free first, then add .align_mem(). I understood. I attempt to arrange commits as your mention. > > Another question below. > >> Signed-off-by: Shunsuke Mie <mie@igel.co.jp> >> --- >> drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >> include/linux/pci-epc.h | 10 +++-- >> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c >> index 2542196e8c3d..60d586e05e7d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c >> +++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c >> @@ -430,8 +430,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_epc_set_msix); >> * Invoke to unmap the CPU address from PCI address. >> */ >> void pci_epc_unmap_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> - phys_addr_t phys_addr) >> + phys_addr_t phys_addr, void __iomem *virt_addr, size_t size) >> { >> + u64 aligned_phys; >> + void __iomem *aligned_virt; >> + size_t offset; >> + >> if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions) >> return; >> >> @@ -441,9 +445,22 @@ void pci_epc_unmap_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> if (!epc->ops->unmap_addr) >> return; >> >> + if (epc->ops->align_mem) { >> + mutex_lock(&epc->lock); >> + aligned_phys = epc->ops->align_mem(epc, phys_addr, &size); >> + mutex_unlock(&epc->lock); >> + } else { >> + aligned_phys = phys_addr; >> + } >> + >> + offset = phys_addr - aligned_phys; >> + aligned_virt = virt_addr - offset; >> + >> mutex_lock(&epc->lock); >> - epc->ops->unmap_addr(epc, func_no, vfunc_no, phys_addr); >> + epc->ops->unmap_addr(epc, func_no, vfunc_no, aligned_phys); >> mutex_unlock(&epc->lock); >> + >> + pci_epc_mem_free_addr(epc, aligned_phys, aligned_virt, size); >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_epc_unmap_addr); >> >> @@ -458,26 +475,46 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_epc_unmap_addr); >> * >> * Invoke to map CPU address with PCI address. >> */ >> -int pci_epc_map_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> - phys_addr_t phys_addr, u64 pci_addr, size_t size) >> +void __iomem *pci_epc_map_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> + u64 pci_addr, phys_addr_t *phys_addr, size_t size) >> { >> int ret; >> + u64 aligned_addr; >> + size_t offset; >> + void __iomem *virt_addr; >> >> if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> >> if (vfunc_no > 0 && (!epc->max_vfs || vfunc_no > epc->max_vfs[func_no])) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); >> >> if (!epc->ops->map_addr) >> - return 0; >> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOPTSUPP); >> + >> + if (epc->ops->align_mem) { >> + mutex_lock(&epc->lock); >> + aligned_addr = epc->ops->align_mem(epc, pci_addr, &size); >> + mutex_unlock(&epc->lock); >> + } else { >> + aligned_addr = pci_addr; >> + } >> + >> + offset = pci_addr - aligned_addr; >> + >> + virt_addr = pci_epc_mem_alloc_addr(epc, phys_addr, size); >> + if (!virt_addr) >> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); >> >> mutex_lock(&epc->lock); >> - ret = epc->ops->map_addr(epc, func_no, vfunc_no, phys_addr, pci_addr, >> - size); >> + ret = epc->ops->map_addr(epc, func_no, vfunc_no, *phys_addr, aligned_addr, size); >> mutex_unlock(&epc->lock); >> + if (ret) >> + return ERR_PTR(ret); >> >> - return ret; >> + *phys_addr += offset; >> + >> + return virt_addr + offset; >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_epc_map_addr); >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/pci-epc.h b/include/linux/pci-epc.h >> index a48778e1a4ee..8f29161bce80 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/pci-epc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/pci-epc.h >> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ struct pci_epc_ops { >> phys_addr_t phys_addr, u8 interrupt_num, >> u32 entry_size, u32 *msi_data, >> u32 *msi_addr_offset); >> + u64 (*align_mem)(struct pci_epc *epc, u64 addr, size_t *size); > Is there a requirement for multiple implementations of .align_mem()? > There's only one implementation in this series > (dw_pcie_ep_align_mem()), and it only needs pci->region_align. That > *value* might be DWC-specific, but the concept really isn't, so maybe > there could be a generic function that uses the device-specific value.
That is the correct way, but some handlers require different implementation.
Sorry, this patch could have been misleading. it is my fault. I'll add the other
handlers to a next version.
> >> int (*start)(struct pci_epc *epc); >> void (*stop)(struct pci_epc *epc); >> const struct pci_epc_features* (*get_features)(struct pci_epc *epc, >> @@ -218,11 +219,12 @@ int pci_epc_set_bar(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> struct pci_epf_bar *epf_bar); >> void pci_epc_clear_bar(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> struct pci_epf_bar *epf_bar); >> -int pci_epc_map_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> - phys_addr_t phys_addr, >> - u64 pci_addr, size_t size); >> +void __iomem *pci_epc_map_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> + u64 pci_addr, phys_addr_t *phys_addr, >> + size_t size); >> void pci_epc_unmap_addr(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> - phys_addr_t phys_addr); >> + phys_addr_t phys_addr, void __iomem *virt_addr, >> + size_t size); >> int pci_epc_set_msi(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no, >> u8 interrupts); >> int pci_epc_get_msi(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, u8 vfunc_no); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> Best,
Shunsuke
| |