[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: linux-acpi
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 12/12] memory: RAS2: Add memory RAS2 driver
From: Daniel Ferguson <danielf () os ! amperecomputing ! com>
Date: 2024-03-28 23:41:36
Message-ID: 78d11760-bb43-42a1-a302-3e2d3bf40c48 () os ! amperecomputing ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
> +/*
> + * The below functions are exposed to OSPM, to query, configure and
> + * initiate memory patrol scrub.
> + */
> +static int ras2_is_patrol_scrub_support(struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct acpi_ras2_shared_memory __iomem *generic_comm_base;
> +
> + if (!ras2_ctx || !ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + generic_comm_base = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr;
> + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + generic_comm_base->set_capabilities[0] = 0;
> +
> + /* send command for reading RAS2 capabilities */
> + ret = ras2_send_pcc_cmd(ras2_ctx, RAS2_PCC_CMD_EXEC);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: ras2_send_pcc_cmd failed\n", __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return generic_comm_base->features[0] & RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB;
Since firmware populates the feature bitmask on initialization, it would
seem
that we do not need to send a PCC CMD EXEC to read RAS2 capabilities.
> +}
> +
> +static int ras2_get_patrol_scrub_params(struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx,
> + struct ras2_scrub_params *params)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + u8 min_supp_scrub_rate, max_supp_scrub_rate;
> + struct acpi_ras2_shared_memory __iomem *generic_comm_base;
> + struct acpi_ras2_patrol_scrub_parameter __iomem *patrol_scrub_params;
> +
> + if (!ras2_ctx || !ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + generic_comm_base = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr;
> + patrol_scrub_params = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr + sizeof(*generic_comm_base);
> +
> + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + generic_comm_base->set_capabilities[0] = RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB;
> + /* send command for reading RAS2 capabilities */
> + ret = ras2_send_pcc_cmd(ras2_ctx, RAS2_PCC_CMD_EXEC);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: ras2_send_pcc_cmd failed\n", __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
Similarly, since firmware populates the feature bitmask on
initialization, it would seem that we do not need to send
a PCC CMD EXEC to read RAS2 capabilities.
> +
> + if (!(generic_comm_base->features[0] & RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB) ||
> + !(generic_comm_base->num_parameter_blocks)) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: Platform does not support HW Patrol Scrubber\n", __func__);
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + if (!patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[1]) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: Invalid requested address range, \
> + requested_address_range[0]=0x%llx \
> + requested_address_range[1]=0x%llx\n",
> + __func__,
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[0],
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[1]);
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + }
> +
> + generic_comm_base->set_capabilities[0] = RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB;
> + patrol_scrub_params->header.type = RAS2_TYPE_PATROL_SCRUB;
header.type should already be populated by firmware. Is assigning it
here necessary?
> + patrol_scrub_params->patrol_scrub_command = RAS2_GET_PATROL_PARAMETERS;
> +
> + /* send command for reading the HW patrol scrub parameters */
> + ret = ras2_send_pcc_cmd(ras2_ctx, RAS2_PCC_CMD_EXEC);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: failed to read HW patrol scrub parameters\n",
> + __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + /* copy output scrub parameters */
> + params->addr_base = patrol_scrub_params->actual_address_range[0];
> + params->addr_size = patrol_scrub_params->actual_address_range[1];
> + params->flags = patrol_scrub_params->flags;
> + params->rate = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_RATE_OUT_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_out);
> + min_supp_scrub_rate = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_MIN_RATE_OUT_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_out);
> + max_supp_scrub_rate = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_MAX_RATE_OUT_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_out);
> + snprintf(params->rate_avail, RAS2_MAX_RATE_RANGE_LENGTH,
> + "%d-%d", min_supp_scrub_rate, max_supp_scrub_rate);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int ras2_enable_patrol_scrub(struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx, bool enable)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + struct ras2_scrub_params params;
> + struct acpi_ras2_shared_memory __iomem *generic_comm_base;
> + u8 scrub_rate_to_set, min_supp_scrub_rate, max_supp_scrub_rate;
> + struct acpi_ras2_patrol_scrub_parameter __iomem *patrol_scrub_params;
> +
> + if (!ras2_ctx || !ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + generic_comm_base = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr;
> + patrol_scrub_params = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr + sizeof(*generic_comm_base);
> +
> + if (enable) {
> + ret = ras2_get_patrol_scrub_params(ras2_ctx, ¶ms);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + generic_comm_base->set_capabilities[0] = RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB;
> + patrol_scrub_params->header.type = RAS2_TYPE_PATROL_SCRUB;
header.type should already be populated by firmware. Is assigning it
here necessary?
> +
> + if (enable) {
> + patrol_scrub_params->patrol_scrub_command = RAS2_START_PATROL_SCRUBBER;
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[0] = params.addr_base;
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[1] = params.addr_size;
> +
> + scrub_rate_to_set = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_RATE_IN_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_in);
> + min_supp_scrub_rate = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_MIN_RATE_OUT_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_out);
> + max_supp_scrub_rate = FIELD_GET(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_MAX_RATE_OUT_MASK,
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_out);
> + if (scrub_rate_to_set < min_supp_scrub_rate ||
> + scrub_rate_to_set > max_supp_scrub_rate) {
> + dev_warn(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "patrol scrub rate to set is out of the supported range\n");
> + dev_warn(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "min_supp_scrub_rate=%d max_supp_scrub_rate=%d\n",
> + min_supp_scrub_rate, max_supp_scrub_rate);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + } else {
> + patrol_scrub_params->patrol_scrub_command = RAS2_STOP_PATROL_SCRUBBER;
> + }
> +
> + /* send command for enable/disable HW patrol scrub */
> + ret = ras2_send_pcc_cmd(ras2_ctx, RAS2_PCC_CMD_EXEC);
> + if (ret) {
> + pr_err("%s: failed to enable/disable the HW patrol scrub\n", __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int ras2_enable_background_scrub(struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx, bool enable)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + struct acpi_ras2_shared_memory __iomem *generic_comm_base;
> + struct acpi_ras2_patrol_scrub_parameter __iomem *patrol_scrub_params;
> +
> + if (!ras2_ctx || !ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + generic_comm_base = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr;
> + patrol_scrub_params = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr + sizeof(*generic_comm_base);
> +
> + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + generic_comm_base->set_capabilities[0] = RAS2_SUPPORT_HW_PARTOL_SCRUB;
> + patrol_scrub_params->header.type = RAS2_TYPE_PATROL_SCRUB;
header.type should already be populated by firmware. Is assigning it
here necessary?
> + patrol_scrub_params->patrol_scrub_command = RAS2_START_PATROL_SCRUBBER;
> +
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_in &= ~RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_EN_BACKGROUND;
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_in |= FIELD_PREP(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_EN_BACKGROUND,
> + enable);
> +
> + /* send command for enable/disable HW patrol scrub */
> + ret = ras2_send_pcc_cmd(ras2_ctx, RAS2_PCC_CMD_EXEC);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev,
> + "%s: failed to enable/disable background patrol scrubbing\n",
> + __func__);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +static int ras2_set_patrol_scrub_params(struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx,
> + struct ras2_scrub_params *params, u8 param_type)
> +{
> + struct acpi_ras2_shared_memory __iomem *generic_comm_base;
> + struct acpi_ras2_patrol_scrub_parameter __iomem *patrol_scrub_params;
> +
> + if (!ras2_ctx || !ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + generic_comm_base = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr;
> + patrol_scrub_params = ras2_ctx->pcc_comm_addr + sizeof(*generic_comm_base);
> +
> + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + patrol_scrub_params->header.type = RAS2_TYPE_PATROL_SCRUB;
> + if (param_type == RAS2_MEM_SCRUB_PARAM_ADDR_BASE && params->addr_base) {
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[0] = params->addr_base;
> + } else if (param_type == RAS2_MEM_SCRUB_PARAM_ADDR_SIZE && params->addr_size) {
> + patrol_scrub_params->requested_address_range[1] = params->addr_size;
> + } else if (param_type == RAS2_MEM_SCRUB_PARAM_RATE) {
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_in &= ~RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_RATE_IN_MASK;
> + patrol_scrub_params->scrub_params_in |= FIELD_PREP(RAS2_PATROL_SCRUB_RATE_IN_MASK,
> + params->rate);
> + } else {
> + dev_err(ras2_ctx->dev, "Invalid patrol scrub parameter to set\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct ras2_hw_scrub_ops ras2_hw_ops = {
> + .enable_scrub = ras2_enable_patrol_scrub,
> + .enable_background_scrub = ras2_enable_background_scrub,
> + .get_scrub_params = ras2_get_patrol_scrub_params,
> + .set_scrub_params = ras2_set_patrol_scrub_params,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct scrub_ops ras2_scrub_ops = {
> + .is_visible = ras2_hw_scrub_is_visible,
> + .read = ras2_hw_scrub_read,
> + .write = ras2_hw_scrub_write,
> + .read_string = ras2_hw_scrub_read_strings,
> +};
> +
> +static DEFINE_IDA(ras2_ida);
> +
> +static void devm_ras2_release(void *ctx)
> +{
> + struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx = ctx;
> +
> + ida_free(&ras2_ida, ras2_ctx->id);
> + ras2_unregister_pcc_channel(ras2_ctx);
> +}
> +
> +static int ras2_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + int ret, id;
> + struct mbox_client *cl;
> + struct device *hw_scrub_dev;
> + struct ras2_context *ras2_ctx;
> + char scrub_name[RAS2_MAX_NAME_LENGTH];
> +
> + ras2_ctx = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*ras2_ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!ras2_ctx)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ras2_ctx->dev = &pdev->dev;
> + ras2_ctx->ops = &ras2_hw_ops;
> + spin_lock_init(&ras2_ctx->spinlock);
> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ras2_ctx);
> +
> + cl = &ras2_ctx->mbox_client;
> + /* Request mailbox channel */
> + cl->dev = &pdev->dev;
> + cl->tx_done = ras2_tx_done;
> + cl->knows_txdone = true;
> + ras2_ctx->pcc_subspace_idx = *((int *)pdev->dev.platform_data);
> + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "pcc-subspace-id=%d\n", ras2_ctx->pcc_subspace_idx);
> + ret = ras2_register_pcc_channel(ras2_ctx);
In our enabling activities, we have found a challenge here.
Our hardware has a single PCC channel corresponding to a single
platform-wide scrub interface. This driver, following the ACPI spec,
will create a new scrub node for each NUMA node. However, for us,
this means that each scrub device will try to map the same PCC channel,
and this causes an error.
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev, devm_ras2_release, ras2_ctx);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> +
> + if (ras2_is_patrol_scrub_support(ras2_ctx)) {
> + id = ida_alloc(&ras2_ida, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (id < 0)
> + return id;
> + ras2_ctx->id = id;
> + snprintf(scrub_name, sizeof(scrub_name), "%s%d", RAS2_SCRUB, id);
> + dev_set_name(&pdev->dev, RAS2_ID_FORMAT, id);
> + hw_scrub_dev = devm_scrub_device_register(&pdev->dev, scrub_name,
> + ras2_ctx, &ras2_scrub_ops,
> + 0, NULL);
> + if (PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(hw_scrub_dev))
> + return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(hw_scrub_dev);
> + }
> + ras2_ctx->scrub_dev = hw_scrub_dev;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic