Re: [PATCH v10 1/3] dmaengine: ptdma: Initial driver for the AMD PTDMA
From: Sanjay R Mehta <hidden>
Date: 2021-07-28 09:17:05
Also in:
lkml
On 7/28/2021 11:25 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
[CAUTION: External Email]
Thanks Vinod for the feedback.
On 20-06-21, 11:41, Sanjay R Mehta wrote:quoted
+static irqreturn_t pt_core_irq_handler(int irq, void *data) +{ + struct pt_device *pt = data; + struct pt_cmd_queue *cmd_q = &pt->cmd_q; + u32 status; + bool err = true; + + pt_core_disable_queue_interrupts(pt); + + status = ioread32(cmd_q->reg_interrupt_status); + if (status) { + cmd_q->int_status = status; + cmd_q->q_status = ioread32(cmd_q->reg_status); + cmd_q->q_int_status = ioread32(cmd_q->reg_int_status); + + /* On error, only save the first error value */ + if ((status & INT_ERROR) && !cmd_q->cmd_error) { + cmd_q->cmd_error = CMD_Q_ERROR(cmd_q->q_status); + err = false; + } + + /* Acknowledge the interrupt */ + iowrite32(status, cmd_q->reg_interrupt_status); + } + + pt_core_enable_queue_interrupts(pt); + + return err ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;On err you should not return IRQ_NONE. IRQ_NONE means "interrupt was not from this device or was not handled" Error is handled here!
Got it. Sure, will change it.
quoted
+static struct pt_device *pt_alloc_struct(struct device *dev) +{ + struct pt_device *pt; + + pt = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pt), GFP_KERNEL); + + if (!pt) + return NULL; + pt->dev = dev; + + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pt->cmd); + + snprintf(pt->name, MAX_PT_NAME_LEN, "pt-%s", dev_name(dev));what is this name used for? Why not use dev_name everywhere?
Sure, will change it to dev_name.
quoted
+static int pt_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) +{ + struct pt_device *pt; + struct pt_msix *pt_msix; + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; + void __iomem * const *iomap_table; + int bar_mask; + int ret = -ENOMEM; + + pt = pt_alloc_struct(dev); + if (!pt) + goto e_err; + + pt_msix = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pt_msix), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!pt_msix) + goto e_err; + + pt->pt_msix = pt_msix; + pt->dev_vdata = (struct pt_dev_vdata *)id->driver_data; + if (!pt->dev_vdata) { + ret = -ENODEV; + dev_err(dev, "missing driver data\n"); + goto e_err; + } + + ret = pcim_enable_device(pdev); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "pcim_enable_device failed (%d)\n", ret); + goto e_err; + } + + bar_mask = pci_select_bars(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM); + ret = pcim_iomap_regions(pdev, bar_mask, "ptdma"); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "pcim_iomap_regions failed (%d)\n", ret); + goto e_err; + } + + iomap_table = pcim_iomap_table(pdev); + if (!iomap_table) { + dev_err(dev, "pcim_iomap_table failed\n"); + ret = -ENOMEM; + goto e_err; + } + + pt->io_regs = iomap_table[pt->dev_vdata->bar]; + if (!pt->io_regs) { + dev_err(dev, "ioremap failed\n"); + ret = -ENOMEM; + goto e_err; + } + + ret = pt_get_irqs(pt); + if (ret) + goto e_err; + + pci_set_master(pdev); + + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(48)); + if (ret) { + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32)); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "dma_set_mask_and_coherent failed (%d)\n", + ret); + goto e_err; + } + } + + dev_set_drvdata(dev, pt); + + if (pt->dev_vdata) + ret = pt_core_init(pt); + + if (ret) + goto e_err; + + return 0; + +e_err: + dev_err(dev, "initialization failed\n");log the err code, that is very useful!quoted
+ /* Register addresses for queue */ + void __iomem *reg_control; + void __iomem *reg_tail_lo; + void __iomem *reg_head_lo; + void __iomem *reg_int_enable; + void __iomem *reg_interrupt_status; + void __iomem *reg_status; + void __iomem *reg_int_status; + void __iomem *reg_dma_status; + void __iomem *reg_dma_read_status; + void __iomem *reg_dma_write_status;this looks like pointer to registers, wont it make sense to keep base ptr and use offset to read..? Looking at pt_init_cmdq_regs(), i think that seems to be the case. Why waste so much memory by having so many pointers?
Yes, you are right. I will make this changes.
quoted
+ u32 qcontrol; /* Cached control register */ + + /* Status values from job */ + u32 int_status; + u32 q_status; + u32 q_int_status; + u32 cmd_error; +} ____cacheline_aligned; + +struct pt_device { + struct list_head entry; + + unsigned int ord;Unused?
Sure. Will remove it.
-- ~Vinod