[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: Question on PCIe Device Tree bindings, Was: [PATCH] xen/arm: domain_build: Ignore device nodes with invalid addresses
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 9:51 PM Elliott Mitchell <ehem+undef@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 04, 2021 at 03:52:26PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:33 PM Stefano Stabellini > > <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, 4 Feb 2021, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:36 PM Stefano Stabellini > > > > <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 4 Feb 2021, Rob Herring wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 11:56 AM Stefano Stabellini > > > > > > <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Rob, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We have a question on the PCIe device tree bindings. In summary, > > > > > > > we have > > > > > > > come across the Raspberry Pi 4 PCIe description below: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pcie0: pcie@7d500000 { > > > > > > > compatible = "brcm,bcm2711-pcie"; > > > > > > > reg = <0x0 0x7d500000 0x0 0x9310>; > > > > > > > device_type = "pci"; > > > > > > > #address-cells = <3>; > > > > > > > #interrupt-cells = <1>; > > > > > > > #size-cells = <2>; > > > > > > > interrupts = <GIC_SPI 148 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, > > > > > > > <GIC_SPI 148 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > > > > > > interrupt-names = "pcie", "msi"; > > > > > > > interrupt-map-mask = <0x0 0x0 0x0 0x7>; > > > > > > > interrupt-map = <0 0 0 1 &gicv2 GIC_SPI 143 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; > > > > > > > msi-controller; > > > > > > > msi-parent = <&pcie0>; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ranges = <0x02000000 0x0 0xc0000000 0x6 0x00000000 > > > > > > > 0x0 0x40000000>; > > > > > > > /* > > > > > > > * The wrapper around the PCIe block has a bug > > > > > > > * preventing it from accessing beyond the first 3GB of > > > > > > > * memory. > > > > > > > */ > > > > > > > dma-ranges = <0x02000000 0x0 0x00000000 0x0 0x00000000 > > > > > > > 0x0 0xc0000000>; > > > > > > > brcm,enable-ssc; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > pci@1,0 { > > > > > > > #address-cells = <3>; > > > > > > > #size-cells = <2>; > > > > > > > ranges; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reg = <0 0 0 0 0>; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > usb@1,0 { > > > > > > > reg = <0x10000 0 0 0 0>; > > > > > > > resets = <&reset > > > > > > > RASPBERRYPI_FIRMWARE_RESET_ID_USB>; > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > }; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Xen fails to parse it with an error because it tries to remap reg > > > > > > > = > > > > > > > <0x10000 0 0 0 0> as if it was a CPU address and of course it > > > > > > > fails. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reading the device tree description in details, I cannot tell if > > > > > > > Xen has > > > > > > > a bug: the ranges property under pci@1,0 means that pci@1,0 is > > > > > > > treated > > > > > > > like a default bus (not a PCI bus), hence, the children regs are > > > > > > > translated using the ranges property of the parent > > > > > > > (pcie@7d500000). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible that the device tree is missing device_type = > > > > > > > "pci" under pci@1,0? Or is it just implied because pci@1,0 is a > > > > > > > child of > > > > > > > pcie@7d500000? > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed, it should have device_type. Linux (only recently due to > > > > > > another missing device_type case) will also look at node name, but > > > > > > only 'pcie'. > > > > > > > > > > > > We should be able to create (or extend pci-bus.yaml) a schema to > > > > > > catch > > > > > > this case. > > > > > > > > > > Ah, that is what I needed to know, thank you! Is Linux considering a > > > > > node named "pcie" as if it has device_type = "pci"? > > > > > > > > Yes, it was added for Rockchip RK3399 to avoid a DT update and > > > > regression. > > > > > > > > > In Xen, also to cover the RPi4 case, maybe I could add a check for the > > > > > node name to be "pci" or "pcie" and if so Xen could assume > > > > > device_type = > > > > > "pci". > > > > > > > > I assume this never worked for RPi4 (and Linux will have the same > > > > issue), so can't we just update the DT in this case? > > > > > > I am not sure where the DT is coming from, probably from the RPi4 kernel > > > trees or firmware. I think it would be good if somebody got in touch to > > > tell them they have an issue. > > > > So you just take whatever downstream RPi invents? Good luck. > > > > > Elliot, where was that device tree coming from originally? > > Please excuse my very weak device-tree fu... > > I'm unsure which section is the problem, but looking at `git blame` what > shows is commt d5c8dc0d4c880fbde5293cc186b1ab23466254c4. > > This commit is present in the Linux master branch and the linux-5.10.y > branch. > > You were saying? That commit looks perfectly fine. The problem is the PCI bridge node shown above which doesn't exist upstream. Rob
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |