[PATCH 08/14] peci: Add device detection
Winiarska, Iwona
iwona.winiarska at intel.com
Fri Jul 30 04:55:19 AEST 2021
On Tue, 2021-07-27 at 17:49 +0000, Zev Weiss wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 05:04:41PM CDT, Iwona Winiarska wrote:
> > Since PECI devices are discoverable, we can dynamically detect devices
> > that are actually available in the system.
> >
> > This change complements the earlier implementation by rescanning PECI
> > bus to detect available devices. For this purpose, it also introduces the
> > minimal API for PECI requests.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Iwona Winiarska <iwona.winiarska at intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart at linux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/peci/Makefile | 2 +-
> > drivers/peci/core.c | 13 ++++-
> > drivers/peci/device.c | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/peci/internal.h | 15 ++++++
> > drivers/peci/request.c | 74 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/peci/sysfs.c | 34 ++++++++++++
> > 6 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 drivers/peci/device.c
> > create mode 100644 drivers/peci/request.c
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/Makefile b/drivers/peci/Makefile
> > index 621a993e306a..917f689e147a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/peci/Makefile
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/Makefile
> > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> >
> > # Core functionality
> > -peci-y := core.o sysfs.o
> > +peci-y := core.o request.o device.o sysfs.o
> > obj-$(CONFIG_PECI) += peci.o
> >
> > # Hardware specific bus drivers
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/core.c b/drivers/peci/core.c
> > index 0ad00110459d..ae7a9572cdf3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/peci/core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/core.c
> > @@ -31,7 +31,15 @@ struct device_type peci_controller_type = {
> >
> > int peci_controller_scan_devices(struct peci_controller *controller)
> > {
> > - /* Just a stub, no support for actual devices yet */
> > + int ret;
> > + u8 addr;
> > +
> > + for (addr = PECI_BASE_ADDR; addr < PECI_BASE_ADDR +
> > PECI_DEVICE_NUM_MAX; addr++) {
> > + ret = peci_device_create(controller, addr);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -106,7 +114,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(peci_controller_add, PECI);
> >
> > static int _unregister(struct device *dev, void *dummy)
> > {
> > - /* Just a stub, no support for actual devices yet */
> > + peci_device_destroy(to_peci_device(dev));
> > +
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/device.c b/drivers/peci/device.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..1124862211e2
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/device.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +// Copyright (c) 2018-2021 Intel Corporation
> > +
> > +#include <linux/peci.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +
> > +#include "internal.h"
> > +
> > +static int peci_detect(struct peci_controller *controller, u8 addr)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_request *req;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + req = peci_request_alloc(NULL, 0, 0);
> > + if (!req)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
>
> Might be worth a brief comment here noting that an empty request happens
> to be the format of a PECI ping command (and/or change the name of the
> function to peci_ping()).
I'll add a comment:
"We are using PECI Ping command to detect presence of PECI devices."
>
> > + mutex_lock(&controller->bus_lock);
> > + ret = controller->xfer(controller, addr, req);
> > + mutex_unlock(&controller->bus_lock);
> > +
> > + peci_request_free(req);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static bool peci_addr_valid(u8 addr)
> > +{
> > + return addr >= PECI_BASE_ADDR && addr < PECI_BASE_ADDR +
> > PECI_DEVICE_NUM_MAX;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int peci_dev_exists(struct device *dev, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_device *device = to_peci_device(dev);
> > + u8 *addr = data;
> > +
> > + if (device->addr == *addr)
> > + return -EBUSY;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +int peci_device_create(struct peci_controller *controller, u8 addr)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_device *device;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + if (WARN_ON(!peci_addr_valid(addr)))
> > + return -EINVAL;
>
> Wondering about the necessity of this check (and the peci_addr_valid()
> function) -- as of the end of this patch series, there's only one caller
> of peci_device_create(), and it's peci_controller_scan_devices() looping
> from PECI_BASE_ADDR to PECI_BASE_ADDR + PECI_DEVICE_NUM_MAX, so
> checking that the address is in that range seems a bit redundant. Do we
> anticipate that we might gain additional callers in the future that
> could run a non-zero risk of passing a bad address?
It's just a sanity check to avoid any surprises if the code changes in the
future.
>
> > +
> > + /* Check if we have already detected this device before. */
> > + ret = device_for_each_child(&controller->dev, &addr,
> > peci_dev_exists);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > + ret = peci_detect(controller, addr);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + /*
> > + * Device not present or host state doesn't allow successful
> > + * detection at this time.
> > + */
> > + if (ret == -EIO || ret == -ETIMEDOUT)
> > + return 0;
>
> Do we really want to be ignoring EIO here? From a look at
> aspeed_peci_xfer(), it looks like the only path that would produce that
> is the non-timeout, non-CMD_DONE case, which I guess happens on
> contention or FCS errors and such. Should we maybe have some automatic
> (limited) retry loop for cases like those?
Yes, we want to ignore EIO here.
It may be returned when we get "Bad Write FCS", after we try to ping non-
existing PECI device.
>
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + device = kzalloc(sizeof(*device), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!device)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + device->controller = controller;
> > + device->addr = addr;
> > + device->dev.parent = &device->controller->dev;
> > + device->dev.bus = &peci_bus_type;
> > + device->dev.type = &peci_device_type;
> > +
> > + ret = dev_set_name(&device->dev, "%d-%02x", controller->id, device-
> > >addr);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_free;
> > +
> > + ret = device_register(&device->dev);
> > + if (ret)
> > + goto err_put;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +err_put:
> > + put_device(&device->dev);
> > +err_free:
> > + kfree(device);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void peci_device_destroy(struct peci_device *device)
> > +{
> > + device_unregister(&device->dev);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void peci_device_release(struct device *dev)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_device *device = to_peci_device(dev);
> > +
> > + kfree(device);
> > +}
> > +
> > +struct device_type peci_device_type = {
> > + .groups = peci_device_groups,
> > + .release = peci_device_release,
> > +};
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/internal.h b/drivers/peci/internal.h
> > index 80c61bcdfc6b..6b139adaf6b8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/peci/internal.h
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/internal.h
> > @@ -9,6 +9,21 @@
> >
> > struct peci_controller;
> > struct attribute_group;
> > +struct peci_device;
> > +struct peci_request;
> > +
> > +/* PECI CPU address range 0x30-0x37 */
> > +#define PECI_BASE_ADDR 0x30
> > +#define PECI_DEVICE_NUM_MAX 8
> > +
> > +struct peci_request *peci_request_alloc(struct peci_device *device, u8
> > tx_len, u8 rx_len);
> > +void peci_request_free(struct peci_request *req);
> > +
> > +extern struct device_type peci_device_type;
> > +extern const struct attribute_group *peci_device_groups[];
> > +
> > +int peci_device_create(struct peci_controller *controller, u8 addr);
> > +void peci_device_destroy(struct peci_device *device);
> >
> > extern struct bus_type peci_bus_type;
> > extern const struct attribute_group *peci_bus_groups[];
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/request.c b/drivers/peci/request.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..78cee51dfae1
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/request.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > +// Copyright (c) 2021 Intel Corporation
> > +
> > +#include <linux/export.h>
> > +#include <linux/peci.h>
> > +#include <linux/slab.h>
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +
> > +#include "internal.h"
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * peci_request_alloc() - allocate &struct peci_request with buffers with
> > given lengths
> > + * @device: PECI device to which request is going to be sent
> > + * @tx_len: requested TX buffer length
> > + * @rx_len: requested RX buffer length
> > + *
> > + * Return: A pointer to a newly allocated &struct peci_request on success
> > or NULL otherwise.
> > + */
> > +struct peci_request *peci_request_alloc(struct peci_device *device, u8
> > tx_len, u8 rx_len)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_request *req;
> > + u8 *tx_buf, *rx_buf;
> > +
> > + req = kzalloc(sizeof(*req), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!req)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + req->device = device;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * PECI controllers that we are using now don't support DMA, this
> > + * should be converted to DMA API once support for controllers that
> > do
> > + * allow it is added to avoid an extra copy.
> > + */
> > + if (tx_len) {
> > + tx_buf = kzalloc(tx_len, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!tx_buf)
> > + goto err_free_req;
> > +
> > + req->tx.buf = tx_buf;
> > + req->tx.len = tx_len;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (rx_len) {
> > + rx_buf = kzalloc(rx_len, GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!rx_buf)
> > + goto err_free_tx;
> > +
> > + req->rx.buf = rx_buf;
> > + req->rx.len = rx_len;
> > + }
> > +
>
> As long as we're punting on DMA support, could we do the whole thing in
> a single allocation instead of three? It'd add some pointer arithmetic,
> but would also simplify the error-handling/deallocation paths a bit.
>
> Or, given that the one controller we're currently supporting has a
> hardware limit of 32 bytes per transfer anyway, maybe just inline
> fixed-size rx/tx buffers into struct peci_request and have callers keep
> them on the stack instead of kmalloc()-ing them?
I disagree on error handling (it's not complicated) - however, one argument for
doing a single alloc (or moving the buffers as fixed-size arrays inside struct
peci_request) is that single kzalloc is going to be faster than 3. But I don't
expect it to show up on any perf profiles for now (since peci-wire interface is
not a speed demon).
I wanted to avoid defining max size for TX and RX in peci-core.
Do you have a strong opinion against multiple alloc? If yes, I can go with
fixed-size arrays inside struct peci_request.
Thanks
-Iwona
>
> > + return req;
> > +
> > +err_free_tx:
> > + kfree(req->tx.buf);
> > +err_free_req:
> > + kfree(req);
> > +
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(peci_request_alloc, PECI);
> > +
> > +/**
> > + * peci_request_free() - free peci_request
> > + * @req: the PECI request to be freed
> > + */
> > +void peci_request_free(struct peci_request *req)
> > +{
> > + kfree(req->rx.buf);
> > + kfree(req->tx.buf);
> > + kfree(req);
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(peci_request_free, PECI);
> > diff --git a/drivers/peci/sysfs.c b/drivers/peci/sysfs.c
> > index 36c5e2a18a92..db9ef05776e3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/peci/sysfs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/peci/sysfs.c
> > @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> > // Copyright (c) 2021 Intel Corporation
> >
> > +#include <linux/device.h>
> > +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> > #include <linux/peci.h>
> >
> > #include "internal.h"
> > @@ -46,3 +48,35 @@ const struct attribute_group *peci_bus_groups[] = {
> > &peci_bus_group,
> > NULL
> > };
> > +
> > +static ssize_t remove_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute
> > *attr,
> > + const char *buf, size_t count)
> > +{
> > + struct peci_device *device = to_peci_device(dev);
> > + bool res;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = kstrtobool(buf, &res);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + if (res && device_remove_file_self(dev, attr))
> > + peci_device_destroy(device);
> > +
> > + return count;
> > +}
> > +static DEVICE_ATTR_IGNORE_LOCKDEP(remove, 0200, NULL, remove_store);
> > +
> > +static struct attribute *peci_device_attrs[] = {
> > + &dev_attr_remove.attr,
> > + NULL
> > +};
> > +
> > +static const struct attribute_group peci_device_group = {
> > + .attrs = peci_device_attrs,
> > +};
> > +
> > +const struct attribute_group *peci_device_groups[] = {
> > + &peci_device_group,
> > + NULL
> > +};
> > --
> > 2.31.1
More information about the Linux-aspeed
mailing list