[PATCH 2/3] PCI: dwc: Visoconti: PCIe RC controller driver
Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
nobuhiro1.iwamatsu at toshiba.co.jp
Thu Apr 8 10:34:09 BST 2021
Hi,
Thanks for your review.
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 09:27:34AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 12:18:38PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > Add support to PCIe RC controller on Toshiba Visconti ARM SoCs.
> > PCIe controller is based of Synopsys DesignWare PCIe core.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yuji Ishikawa <yuji2.ishikawa at toshiba.co.jp>
> > Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu at toshiba.co.jp>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig | 10 +
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile | 1 +
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-visconti.c | 358 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 369 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-visconti.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> > index b9aaa84452c4..ae125d7cf375 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Kconfig
> > @@ -286,6 +286,16 @@ config PCIE_TEGRA194_EP
> > in order to enable device-specific features PCIE_TEGRA194_EP must be
> > selected. This uses the DesignWare core.
> >
> > +config PCIE_VISCONTI
> > + bool "Toshiba VISCONTI PCIe controllers"
> > + depends on ARCH_VISCONTI || COMPILE_TEST
> > + depends on OF && HAS_IOMEM
>
> Is this line really needed? Seems we have a mixture on other drivers.
hmm, thanks. I will remove this.
>
> > + depends on PCI_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
> > + select PCIE_DW_HOST
> > + help
> > + Say Y here if you want PCIe controller support on Toshiba Visconti SoC.
> > + This driver supports TMPV77xx.
> > +
> > config PCIE_UNIPHIER
> > bool "Socionext UniPhier PCIe host controllers"
> > depends on ARCH_UNIPHIER || COMPILE_TEST
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
> > index ba7c42f6df6f..46ac5d49dc75 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/Makefile
> > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PCI_MESON) += pci-meson.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_TEGRA194) += pcie-tegra194.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_UNIPHIER) += pcie-uniphier.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_UNIPHIER_EP) += pcie-uniphier-ep.o
> > +obj-$(CONFIG_PCIE_VISCONTI) += pcie-visconti.o
> >
> > # The following drivers are for devices that use the generic ACPI
> > # pci_root.c driver but don't support standard ECAM config access.
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-visconti.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-visconti.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..e24f83df41b8
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-visconti.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,358 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +/*
> > + * DWC PCIe RC driver for Toshiba Visconti ARM SoC
> > + *
> > + * Copyright (C) 2019, 2020 Toshiba Electronic Device & Storage Corporation
> > + * Copyright (C) 2020, TOSHIBA CORPORATION
> > + *
> > + * Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro1.iwamatsu at toshiba.co.jp>
> > + *
> > + */
> > +
> > +#include <linux/clk.h>
> > +#include <linux/delay.h>
> > +#include <linux/gpio.h>
> > +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > +#include <linux/init.h>
> > +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_platform.h>
> > +#include <linux/pci.h>
> > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/resource.h>
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +
> > +#include "pcie-designware.h"
> > +#include "../../pci.h"
> > +
> > +struct visconti_pcie {
> > + struct dw_pcie *pci;
>
> Embed this rather than a pointer. 1 less alloc.
I see. I will change .
>
> > + void __iomem *ulreg_base;
> > + void __iomem *smu_base;
> > + void __iomem *mpu_base;
> > + struct clk *refclk;
> > + struct clk *sysclk;
> > + struct clk *auxclk;
> > +};
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PCIE_MODE 0x00F4
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PCIE_MODE_EP 0x00
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PCIE_MODE_RC 0x04
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PERSTN_CTRL 0x00F8
> > +#define PCIE_UL_IOM_PCIE_PERSTN_I_EN BIT(3)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_DIRECT_PERSTN_EN BIT(2)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_PERSTN_OUT BIT(1)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_DIRECT_PERSTN BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PHY_INIT_02 0x0104
> > +#define PCIE_UL_PHY0_SRAM_EXT_LD_DONE BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_PHY_INIT_03 0x0108
> > +#define PCIE_UL_PHY0_SRAM_INIT_DONE BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_INT_EVENT_MASK1 0x0138
> > +#define PCIE_UL_CFG_PME_INT BIT(0)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_CFG_LINK_EQ_REQ_INT BIT(1)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT0 BIT(2)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT1 BIT(3)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT2 BIT(4)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT3 BIT(5)
> > +#define PCIE_UL_S_INT_EVENT_MASK1_ALL (PCIE_UL_CFG_PME_INT | PCIE_UL_CFG_LINK_EQ_REQ_INT | \
> > + PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT0 | PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT1 | \
> > + PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT2 | PCIE_UL_EDMA_INT3)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_SB_MON 0x0198
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_S_SIG_MON 0x019C
> > +#define PCIE_UL_CORE_RST_N_MON BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_V_SII_DBG_00 0x0844
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_V_SII_GEN_CTRL_01 0x0860
> > +#define PCIE_UL_APP_LTSSM_ENABLE BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_V_PHY_ST_00 0x0864
> > +#define PCIE_UL_SMLH_LINK_UP BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_UL_REG_V_PHY_ST_02 0x0868
> > +#define PCIE_UL_S_DETECT_ACT 0x01
> > +#define PCIE_UL_S_L0 0x11
> > +
> > +#define PISMU_CKON_PCIE 0x0038
> > +#define PISMU_CKON_PCIE_AUX_CLK BIT(1)
> > +#define PISMU_CKON_PCIE_MSTR_ACLK BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE 0x0538
> > +#define PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE_ULREG_RST_N BIT(1)
> > +#define PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE_PWR_UP_RST_N BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_MPU_REG_MP_EN 0x0
> > +#define MPU_MP_EN_DISABLE BIT(0)
> > +
> > +#define PCIE_BUS_OFFSET 0x40000000
> > +
> > +/* Access registers in PCIe ulreg */
> > +static inline void visconti_ulreg_writel(struct visconti_pcie *pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
> > +{
> > + writel(val, pcie->ulreg_base + reg);
>
> Do these need ordering WRT DMA? If not, use _relaxed variant.
This and others does not required WRT DMA. I will change to use _relaxed functions.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Access registers in PCIe smu */
> > +static inline void visconti_smu_writel(struct visconti_pcie *pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
> > +{
> > + writel(val, pcie->smu_base + reg);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Access registers in PCIe mpu */
> > +static inline void visconti_mpu_writel(struct visconti_pcie *pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
> > +{
> > + writel(val, pcie->mpu_base + reg);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline u32 visconti_mpu_readl(struct visconti_pcie *pcie, u32 reg)
> > +{
> > + return readl(pcie->mpu_base + reg);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int visconti_pcie_check_link_status(struct visconti_pcie *pcie)
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + /* wait for linkup of phy link layer */
> > + err = readl_poll_timeout(pcie->ulreg_base + PCIE_UL_REG_V_PHY_ST_00, val,
> > + (val & PCIE_UL_SMLH_LINK_UP), 1000, 10000);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + /* wait for linkup of data link layer */
> > + err = readl_poll_timeout(pcie->ulreg_base + PCIE_UL_REG_V_PHY_ST_02, val,
> > + (val & PCIE_UL_S_DETECT_ACT), 1000, 10000);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + /* wait for LTSSM Status */
> > + return readl_poll_timeout(pcie->ulreg_base + PCIE_UL_REG_V_PHY_ST_02, val,
> > + (val & PCIE_UL_S_L0), 1000, 10000);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int visconti_pcie_establish_link(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + u32 val;
> > + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
> > + struct visconti_pcie *pcie = dev_get_drvdata(pci->dev);
> > +
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, PCIE_UL_APP_LTSSM_ENABLE, PCIE_UL_REG_V_SII_GEN_CTRL_01);
> > +
> > + ret = visconti_pcie_check_link_status(pcie);
> > + if (ret < 0) {
> > + dev_info(pci->dev, "Link failure\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + val = visconti_mpu_readl(pcie, PCIE_MPU_REG_MP_EN);
> > + visconti_mpu_writel(pcie, val & ~MPU_MP_EN_DISABLE, PCIE_MPU_REG_MP_EN);
> > +
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, PCIE_UL_S_INT_EVENT_MASK1_ALL, PCIE_UL_REG_S_INT_EVENT_MASK1);
>
> Seems like all this should be a phy driver.
>
I see. I will consider if it can be replaced with a phy driver.
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int visconti_pcie_host_init(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > + struct dw_pcie *pci = to_dw_pcie_from_pp(pp);
> > +
> > + dw_pcie_setup_rc(pp);
>
> > + ret = visconti_pcie_establish_link(pp);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + dw_pcie_wait_for_link(pci);
>
> The DWC core code does link handling now.
>
OK, I will check this.
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct dw_pcie_host_ops visconti_pcie_host_ops = {
> > + .host_init = visconti_pcie_host_init,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static u64 visconti_pcie_cpu_addr_fixup(struct dw_pcie *pci, u64 pci_addr)
> > +{
> > + return pci_addr - PCIE_BUS_OFFSET;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const struct dw_pcie_ops dw_pcie_ops = {
> > + .cpu_addr_fixup = visconti_pcie_cpu_addr_fixup,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int visconti_get_resources(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > + struct visconti_pcie *pcie)
> > +{
> > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +
> > + pcie->pci->dbi_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "dbi");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->pci->dbi_base))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->pci->dbi_base);
>
> The DWC core handles this now.
OK, I will drop this.
>
> > +
> > + pcie->ulreg_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "ulreg");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->ulreg_base))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->ulreg_base);
> > +
> > + pcie->smu_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "smu");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->smu_base))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->smu_base);
> > +
> > + pcie->mpu_base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource_byname(pdev, "mpu");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->mpu_base))
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->mpu_base);
> > +
> > + pcie->refclk = devm_clk_get(dev, "pcie_refclk");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->refclk)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to get refclk clock: %ld\n", PTR_ERR(pcie->refclk));
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->refclk);
> > + }
> > +
> > + pcie->sysclk = devm_clk_get(dev, "sysclk");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->sysclk)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to get sysclk clock: %ld\n", PTR_ERR(pcie->sysclk));
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->sysclk);
> > + }
> > +
> > + pcie->auxclk = devm_clk_get(dev, "auxclk");
> > + if (IS_ERR(pcie->auxclk)) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "Failed to get auxclk clock: %ld\n", PTR_ERR(pcie->auxclk));
> > + return PTR_ERR(pcie->auxclk);
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int visconti_device_turnon(struct visconti_pcie *pcie)
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > + u32 val;
> > +
> > + visconti_smu_writel(pcie, PISMU_CKON_PCIE_AUX_CLK | PISMU_CKON_PCIE_MSTR_ACLK,
> > + PISMU_CKON_PCIE);
>
> Clock control? Should be a clock provider then.
>
Visconti does not have clock driver yet, I'm also developping a driver for this,
but it's still in the process. I plan to replace it with a clock driver later.
And I should have written this in the commit message.
> > + ndelay(250);
> > +
> > + visconti_smu_writel(pcie, PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE_ULREG_RST_N, PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE);
> > +
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, PCIE_UL_REG_S_PCIE_MODE_RC, PCIE_UL_REG_S_PCIE_MODE);
> > +
> > + val = PCIE_UL_IOM_PCIE_PERSTN_I_EN | PCIE_UL_DIRECT_PERSTN_EN | PCIE_UL_DIRECT_PERSTN;
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, val, PCIE_UL_REG_S_PERSTN_CTRL);
> > + udelay(100);
> > +
> > + val |= PCIE_UL_PERSTN_OUT;
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, val, PCIE_UL_REG_S_PERSTN_CTRL);
> > + udelay(100);
> > +
> > + visconti_smu_writel(pcie, PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE_PWR_UP_RST_N, PISMU_RSOFF_PCIE);
> > +
> > + err = readl_poll_timeout(pcie->ulreg_base + PCIE_UL_REG_S_PHY_INIT_03, val,
> > + (val & PCIE_UL_PHY0_SRAM_INIT_DONE), 100, 1000);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + visconti_ulreg_writel(pcie, PCIE_UL_PHY0_SRAM_EXT_LD_DONE, PCIE_UL_REG_S_PHY_INIT_02);
> > +
> > + return readl_poll_timeout(pcie->ulreg_base + PCIE_UL_REG_S_SIG_MON, val,
> > + (val & PCIE_UL_CORE_RST_N_MON), 100, 1000);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int visconti_add_pcie_port(struct visconti_pcie *pcie, struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > + struct dw_pcie *pci = pcie->pci;
> > + struct pcie_port *pp = &pci->pp;
> > + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + pp->irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "intr");
> > + if (pp->irq < 0) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "interrupt intr is missing");
> > + return pp->irq;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI_MSI)) {
> > + pp->msi_irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "msi");
> > + if (pp->msi_irq < 0) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "interrupt msi is missing");
> > + return pp->msi_irq;
> > + }
> > + }
>
> DWC core handles this now.
OK, I will drop this.
Best regards,
Nobuhiro
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list