[PATCH v4 2/9] usb: xhci: Use only 32-bit accesses in xhci_writeq/xhci_readq

Sylwester Nawrocki s.nawrocki at samsung.com
Tue May 26 13:06:55 CEST 2020


On 26.05.2020 09:49, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> On 25.05.2020 23:40, Simon Glass wrote:
>> On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 11:42, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki at samsung.com> wrote:
>>> On 25.05.2020 19:04, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 10:57, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki at samsung.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 25.05.2020 16:57, Simon Glass wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 05:40, Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki at samsung.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> There might be hardware configurations where 64-bit data accesses
>>>>>>> to XHCI registers are not supported properly.  This patch removes
>>>>>>> the readq/writeq so always two 32-bit accesses are used to read/write
>>>>>>> 64-bit XHCI registers, similarly as it is done in Linux kernel.
>>>>>>> This patch fixes operation of the XHCI controller on RPI4 Broadcom
>>>>>>> BCM2711 SoC based board, where the VL805 USB XHCI controller is
>>>>>>> connected to the PCIe Root Complex, which is attached to the system
>>>>>>> through the SCB bridge.
>>>>>>> Even though the architecture is 64-bit the PCIe BAR is 32-bit and likely
>>>>>>> the 64-bit wide register accesses initiated by the CPU are not properly
>>>>>>> translated to a sequence of 32-bit PCIe accesses.
>>>>>>> xhci_readq(), for example, always returns same value in upper and lower
>>>>>>> 32-bits, e.g. 0xabcd1234abcd1234 instead of 0x00000000abcd1234.
>>>>>> Then I think this should be done with a quirk flag, enabled for this
>>>>>> particular device via the compatible string. It should not be an #if,
>>>>>> but an if().
>>>>> Thanks for your comments. I will check and see how this could be done.
>>>>> It might not be so straightforward since the XHCI controller is a PCI
>>>>> device matched by the pci_device_id so we would need to be looking
>>>>> at the compatible string of the PCI controller to set the quirk in
>>>>> the xhci layer. It's the PCI bridge that introduces the limitation,
>>>>> not the VL805 XHCI controller chip.
>>>> OK then it should be modelled as such.
>>>> How is this done in Linux?
>>> In Linux simply always two 32-bit accesses are used for 64-bit registers
>>> read/write.

>> Well the USB maintainer (Marek) might be OK with that, not sure.
> 32bit access is always safe according to the XHCI specification and such 
> one is always used by the Linux kernel. 64bit access might give a few 
> CPU cycles of performance improvement, but in case of typical u-boot use 
> case this is simply negligible. Do we really need to make the code 
> over-engineered for no good reason?

I didn't have a chance to measure it but I believe in practice there would be 
no any significant performance improvement. There are only few xhci_readq, 
xhci_writeq calls in the code and most of them are in a one off initialization
procedure. The only one that would matter is in xhci_acknowledge_event(),
but if we add a new (ctrl) argument to xhci_{readq,writeq} and testing of the
quirk it will likely be not much different as if we just used two 32-bit 
reads/writes unconditionally, as far as performance is concerned.

>>> And the quirks in the generic PCI XHCI driver are based on the PCI vendor
>>> and the PCI device ID, so it's not helpful. I couldn't find any reference
>>> to the parent PCI bridge there.

>> In xhci_pci_probe() you can look at the PCI vendor/device  with something like:
>> struct pci_child_platdata *plat = dev_get_parent_platdata(dev);   //
>> see comments for that struct in pci.h

We need to test the PCI bridge so we could use dev->parent rather than dev
here. I'm not sure if the 64-bit data access issue is inherent to the PCI
controller itself or rather to its integration logic within the SoC 
(the SCB bridge). In other words, if in other Broadcom SoC same PCI vendor/
device controller might not need the quirk. I guess such approach would be
good enough. 

The question is whether we want to introduce the quirks mechanism now for
the readq/writeq issue. My feeling is that it's better to align with what
Linux does and the quirks could be useful for other purposes.

>> int quirks = 0;
>> if (plat->vendor == xxx && plat->device == xxx)
>>     quirks |= SOMETHING
>> xhci_register(...., quirks);  // add a new param
>> in xhci_register() you can store the quirk in ctrl.
>>>> You can add a quirk in the PCI controller and then XHCI can check its
>>>> parent's platdata to see the flag, perhaps, since the parent will
>>>> always be UCLASS_PCI.
>>> OK, I imagined something like that.
>>>> You can always add the device to the devicetree if needed, and then
>>>> you get a compatible string.
>>> Will have a look, I wasn't aware we could add a node just for such purpose
>>> without negative side effects.
>> So long as you get the 'reg' property correct (i.e. same bus, device,
>> function) then you are OK. See pci-info.rst for docs


More information about the U-Boot mailing list