On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 12:49 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 14:46:35 +1100
Alastair D'Silva [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
From: Alastair D'Silva <redacted>
Add functions to map/unmap LPC memory
Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <redacted>
---
drivers/misc/ocxl/config.c | 4 +++
drivers/misc/ocxl/core.c | 50
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/misc/ocxl/ocxl_internal.h | 3 ++
include/misc/ocxl.h | 18 +++++++++++
4 files changed, 75 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/ocxl/config.c
b/drivers/misc/ocxl/config.c
index c8e19bfb5ef9..fb0c3b6f8312 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/ocxl/config.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/ocxl/config.c
@@ -568,6 +568,10 @@ static int read_afu_lpc_memory_info(struct
pci_dev *dev,
afu->special_purpose_mem_size =
total_mem_size - lpc_mem_size;
}
+
+ dev_info(&dev->dev, "Probed LPC memory of %#llx bytes and
special purpose memory of %#llx bytes\n",
+ afu->lpc_mem_size, afu->special_purpose_mem_size);
+
If we are being fussy, this block has nothing todo with the rest of
the patch
so we should be seeing it here.
Agreed
quoted
return 0;
}
diff --git a/drivers/misc/ocxl/core.c b/drivers/misc/ocxl/core.c
index 2531c6cf19a0..98611faea219 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/ocxl/core.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/ocxl/core.c
@@ -210,6 +210,55 @@ static void unmap_mmio_areas(struct ocxl_afu
*afu)
release_fn_bar(afu->fn, afu->config.global_mmio_bar);
}
+int ocxl_afu_map_lpc_mem(struct ocxl_afu *afu)
+{
+ struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(afu->fn->dev.parent);
+
+ if ((afu->config.lpc_mem_size + afu-quoted
config.special_purpose_mem_size) == 0)
+ return 0;
+
+ afu->lpc_base_addr = ocxl_link_lpc_map(afu->fn->link, dev);
+ if (afu->lpc_base_addr == 0)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ if (afu->config.lpc_mem_size) {
I was happy with the explicit check on 0 above, but we should be
consistent. Either
we make use of 0 == false, or we don't and explicitly check vs 0.
Hence
if (afu->config.pc_mem_size != 0) {
here or
if (!(afu->config.pc_mem_size + afu-quoted
config.special_purpose_mem_size))
return 0;
above.
This feels a bit niggly, but sure, changed to a '> 0' check.
quoted
+ afu->lpc_res.start = afu->lpc_base_addr + afu-
quoted
config.lpc_mem_offset;
+ afu->lpc_res.end = afu->lpc_res.start + afu-
quoted
config.lpc_mem_size - 1;
+ }
+
+ if (afu->config.special_purpose_mem_size) {
+ afu->special_purpose_res.start = afu->lpc_base_addr +
+ afu-quoted
config.special_purpose_mem_offset;
+ afu->special_purpose_res.end = afu-
quoted
special_purpose_res.start +
+ afu-
quoted
config.special_purpose_mem_size - 1;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ocxl_afu_map_lpc_mem);
+
+struct resource *ocxl_afu_lpc_mem(struct ocxl_afu *afu)
+{
+ return &afu->lpc_res;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ocxl_afu_lpc_mem);
+
+static void unmap_lpc_mem(struct ocxl_afu *afu)
+{
+ struct pci_dev *dev = to_pci_dev(afu->fn->dev.parent);
+
+ if (afu->lpc_res.start || afu->special_purpose_res.start) {
+ void *link = afu->fn->link;
+
+ ocxl_link_lpc_release(link, dev);
+
+ afu->lpc_res.start = 0;
+ afu->lpc_res.end = 0;
+ afu->special_purpose_res.start = 0;
+ afu->special_purpose_res.end = 0;
+ }
+}
+
static int configure_afu(struct ocxl_afu *afu, u8 afu_idx, struct
pci_dev *dev)
{
int rc;@@ -251,6 +300,7 @@ static int configure_afu(struct ocxl_afu *afu,
u8 afu_idx, struct pci_dev *dev)
static void deconfigure_afu(struct ocxl_afu *afu)
{
+ unmap_lpc_mem(afu);
Hmm. This breaks the existing balance between configure_afu and
deconfigure_afu.
Given comments below on why we don't do map_lpc_mem in the afu bring
up
(as it's a shared operation) it seems to me that we should be doing
this
outside of the afu deconfigure. Perhaps ocxl_function_close is
appropriate?
I don't know this infrastructure well enough to be sure.
If it does need to be here, then a comment to give more info on
why would be great!
Sure, I've added a comment in unmap_lpc_mem explaining that lpc_release
only releases the memory on the link when the last consumer calls
release.
It's in deconfigure_afu as the LPC memory is registered and reported
per-AFU (even though it has to be allocated all at once across the
link).
quoted
unmap_mmio_areas(afu);
reclaim_afu_pasid(afu);
reclaim_afu_actag(afu);
diff --git a/drivers/misc/ocxl/ocxl_internal.h
b/drivers/misc/ocxl/ocxl_internal.h
index 20b417e00949..9f4b47900e62 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/ocxl/ocxl_internal.h
+++ b/drivers/misc/ocxl/ocxl_internal.h
@@ -52,6 +52,9 @@ struct ocxl_afu {
void __iomem *global_mmio_ptr;
u64 pp_mmio_start;
void *private;
+ u64 lpc_base_addr; /* Covers both LPC & special purpose memory*/
+ struct resource lpc_res;
+ struct resource special_purpose_res;
};
enum ocxl_context_status {diff --git a/include/misc/ocxl.h b/include/misc/ocxl.h
index 06dd5839e438..6f7c02f0d5e3 100644
--- a/include/misc/ocxl.h
+++ b/include/misc/ocxl.h
@@ -212,6 +212,24 @@ int ocxl_irq_set_handler(struct ocxl_context
*ctx, int irq_id,
// AFU Metadata
+/**
+ * Map the LPC system & special purpose memory for an AFU
+ *
+ * Do not call this during device discovery, as there may me
multiple
+ * devices on a link, and the memory is mapped for the whole link,
not
+ * just one device. It should only be called after all devices
have
+ * registered their memory on the link.
+ *
+ * afu: The AFU that has the LPC memory to map
Run kernel-doc over these files and fix all the errors + warnings.
Ok.
@afu: ..
and missing function name etc.
quoted
+ */
+extern int ocxl_afu_map_lpc_mem(struct ocxl_afu *afu);
+
+/**
+ * Get the physical address range of LPC memory for an AFU
+ * afu: The AFU associated with the LPC memory
+ */
+extern struct resource *ocxl_afu_lpc_mem(struct ocxl_afu *afu);
+
/**
* Get a pointer to the config for an AFU
*
--
Alastair D'Silva
Open Source Developer
Linux Technology Centre, IBM Australia
mob: 0423 762 819