Hi Sergey,
On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 02:57:49PM +0300, Sergey Miroshnichenko wrote:
> The pci_dn structures can be created not only from DT, but also
> directly from newly discovered PCIe devices, so allocate them
> dynamically.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Miroshnichenko <s.miroshniche...@yadro.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kernel/pci_dn.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci_dn.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci_dn.c
> index ab147a1909c8..48ec16407835 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci_dn.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/pci_dn.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,8 @@
> #include <asm/firmware.h>
> #include <asm/eeh.h>
>
> +static struct pci_dn *create_pdn(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct pci_dn
> *parent);
> +
> /*
> * The function is used to find the firmware data of one
> * specific PCI device, which is attached to the indicated
> @@ -58,6 +60,9 @@ static struct pci_dn *pci_bus_to_pdn(struct pci_bus *bus)
> pbus = pbus->parent;
> }
>
> + if (!pbus->self && !pci_is_root_bus(pbus))
> + return NULL;
> +
> /*
> * Except virtual bus, all PCI buses should
> * have device nodes.
> @@ -65,13 +70,15 @@ static struct pci_dn *pci_bus_to_pdn(struct pci_bus *bus)
> dn = pci_bus_to_OF_node(pbus);
> pdn = dn ? PCI_DN(dn) : NULL;
>
> + if (!pdn && pbus->self)
> + pdn = pbus->self->dev.archdata.pci_data;
> +
> return pdn;
> }
>
> struct pci_dn *pci_get_pdn_by_devfn(struct pci_bus *bus,
> int devfn)
> {
> - struct device_node *dn = NULL;
> struct pci_dn *parent, *pdn;
> struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL;
>
> @@ -80,17 +87,10 @@ struct pci_dn *pci_get_pdn_by_devfn(struct pci_bus *bus,
> if (pdev->devfn == devfn) {
> if (pdev->dev.archdata.pci_data)
> return pdev->dev.archdata.pci_data;
> -
> - dn = pci_device_to_OF_node(pdev);
> break;
> }
> }
>
> - /* Fast path: fetch from device node */
> - pdn = dn ? PCI_DN(dn) : NULL;
> - if (pdn)
> - return pdn;
> -
Why is it necessary to remove the above fast-path?
> /* Slow path: fetch from firmware data hierarchy */
> parent = pci_bus_to_pdn(bus);
> if (!parent)
> @@ -128,16 +128,9 @@ struct pci_dn *pci_get_pdn(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> if (!parent)
> return NULL;
>
> - list_for_each_entry(pdn, &parent->child_list, list) {
> - if (pdn->busno == pdev->bus->number &&
> - pdn->devfn == pdev->devfn)
> - return pdn;
> - }
Could you explain why the above block was removed? Is it now impossible
for it to find a pdn?
> -
> - return NULL;
> + return create_pdn(pdev, parent);
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
> static struct pci_dn *add_one_dev_pci_data(struct pci_dn *parent,
> int vf_index,
> int busno, int devfn)
> @@ -156,7 +149,9 @@ static struct pci_dn *add_one_dev_pci_data(struct pci_dn
> *parent,
> pdn->parent = parent;
> pdn->busno = busno;
> pdn->devfn = devfn;
> + #ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
> pdn->vf_index = vf_index;
> + #endif /* CONFIG_PCI_IOV */
> pdn->pe_number = IODA_INVALID_PE;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pdn->child_list);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&pdn->list);
I can see that this change allows you to re-use this to set up a pdn in
create_pdn(). Perhaps you should refactor pci_add_device_node_info() to
use it as well, now that it's possible?
> @@ -164,7 +159,54 @@ static struct pci_dn *add_one_dev_pci_data(struct pci_dn
> *parent,
>
> return pdn;
> }
> -#endif
> +
> +static struct pci_dn *create_pdn(struct pci_dev *pdev, struct pci_dn *parent)
> +{
> + struct pci_dn *pdn = NULL;
> +
> + pdn = add_one_dev_pci_data(parent, 0, pdev->bus->number, pdev->devfn);
> + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "Create a new pdn for devfn %2x\n", pdev->devfn /
> 8);
> +
> + if (pdn) {
> + #ifdef CONFIG_EEH
> + struct eeh_dev *edev;
> + #endif /* CONFIG_EEH */
> + u32 class_code;
> + u16 device_id;
> + u16 vendor_id;
> +
> + #ifdef CONFIG_EEH
> + edev = eeh_dev_init(pdn);
> + if (!edev) {
> + kfree(pdn);
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: Failed to allocate edev\n",
> __func__);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> + #endif /* CONFIG_EEH */
> +
> + pdn->busno = pdev->bus->busn_res.start;
It seems strange that pdn->busno is set by the call to
add_one_dev_pci_data() above (to pdev->bus->number) and then overwritten
here with a different value. Should add_one_dev_pci_data() use
pdev->bus->busn_res.start and this line be removed?
> +
> + pci_bus_read_config_word(pdev->bus, pdev->devfn,
> + PCI_VENDOR_ID, &vendor_id);
> + pdn->vendor_id = vendor_id;
> +
> + pci_bus_read_config_word(pdev->bus, pdev->devfn,
> + PCI_DEVICE_ID, &device_id);
> + pdn->device_id = device_id;
> +
> + pci_bus_read_config_dword(pdev->bus, pdev->devfn,
> + PCI_CLASS_REVISION, &class_code);
> + class_code >>= 8;
> + pdn->class_code = class_code;
> +
> + pdn->pci_ext_config_space = 0;
> + pdev->dev.archdata.pci_data = pdn;
> + } else {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: Failed to allocate pdn\n", __func__);
> + }
> +
> + return pdn;
> +}
>
> struct pci_dn *add_dev_pci_data(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> {
> --
> 2.17.1
>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
