Re: [PATCH v8 8/9] PCI: endpoint: pci-epf-test: Reuse pre-exposed doorbell targets
Niklas Cassel <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.ntb,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-rockchip,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pci |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <aZQ_rEkzWnDeJrMe@ryzen> |
Hello Koichiro, On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 05:06:00PM +0900, Koichiro Den wrote: > pci-epf-test advertises the doorbell target to the RC as a BAR number > and an offset, and the RC rings the doorbell with a single DWORD MMIO > write. > > Some doorbell backends may report that the doorbell target is already > exposed via a platform-owned fixed BAR (db_msg[0].bar/offset). In that > case, reuse the pre-exposed window and do not reprogram the BAR with > pci_epc_set_bar(). > > Also honor db_msg[0].irq_flags when requesting the doorbell IRQ, and > only restore the original BAR mapping on disable if pci-epf-test > programmed it. > > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Koichiro Den <[email protected]> > --- (snip) > @@ -753,22 +771,33 @@ static void pci_epf_test_enable_doorbell(struct pci_epf_test *epf_test, > reg->doorbell_data = cpu_to_le32(msg->data); > reg->doorbell_bar = cpu_to_le32(bar); > > - msg = &epf->db_msg[0].msg; > - ret = pci_epf_align_inbound_addr(epf, bar, ((u64)msg->address_hi << 32) | msg->address_lo, > - &epf_test->db_bar.phys_addr, &offset); > + if (db->bar == NO_BAR) { > + ret = pci_epf_align_inbound_addr(epf, bar, > + ((u64)msg->address_hi << 32) | > + msg->address_lo, > + &epf_test->db_bar.phys_addr, > + &offset); > > - if (ret) > - goto err_free_irq; > + if (ret) > + goto err_free_irq; > + } I tried this series on Rock5b (RK3588), and was surprised to see the doorbell test case still failing. > + > + if (size_add(offset, sizeof(u32)) > epf->bar[bar].size) > + goto err_doorbell_cleanup; It turns out that this check is the reason for it still failing. You see, for a BAR that is marked as BAR_RESERVED, pci-epf-test will not allocate backing memory, so epf->bar[bar].size will be 0. If I removed this check, I could get the test case to pass. As I suggested in my previous email, perhaps this check is better suited in pci_epf_alloc_doorbell(). (As a DWORD alignment check inside pci_epf_alloc_doorbell(). pci_epf_alloc_doorbell() could itself return error if the doorbell is not DWORD aligned.) That way, you could remove this check from pci_epf_test_enable_doorbell(), and we don't need to care about epf->bar[bar].size. Kind regards, Niklas