Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dmaengine: dw-edma: Enable Chan Separation via VSEC

On 13-Aug-26 22:01, Frank Li wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 05:26:51PM +0530, Verma, Devendra wrote:
>> On 10-Aug-26 22:44, Frank Li wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 03:40:01PM +0530, Devendra K Verma wrote:
>>>> As per, 'Designware Cores PCI Express DM Controller - Reference
>>>> Manual', section 3.2.34.3, VSEC for DEVICE INFORMATION supports
>>>> the channel separation mechanisms. Basically, the HDMA IP allows
>>>> the user to configure the separation between DMA channel
>>>> registers and retrieve it via the VSEC capability mentioned
>>>> above.
>>>>
>>>> HDMA IP supports the channel register space separation from
>>>> 256B to 32KB. Default supported size is 256B.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Devendra K Verma <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>      o Replaced 'ch_sep_sz' with 'ch_space_sz' wherever
>>>>        applicable upon reviewer recommendation.
>>>>      o Dropped 1/3 patch of this series, after review,
>>>>        now the 2/3 is 1/2 of the current patch series.
>>>>
>>>> Changes in v1:
>>>>      o Modified dw_edma_get_ch_sep_sz() as per review comment.
>>>>        The function now supports ch_sep_sz up to 32KB.
>>>>      o Updated to description to reflect the supported channel
>>>>        separation sizes.
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
>>>>    1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c b/drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c
>>>> index 791c46e8ae4c..5d7507a64056 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c
>>>> @@ -31,8 +31,10 @@
>>>>
>>>>    #define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_ID		0x6
>>>>    #define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_ID		0x20
>>>> -#define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_BAR		GENMASK(10, 8)
>>>>    #define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_MAP		GENMASK(2, 0)
>>>> +#define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_BAR		GENMASK(10, 8)
>>>
>>> Don't mix code cleanup or reorg into this improvement patches.
>>>
>>
>> It was recommended by you in the v1 of the same patch series that is
>> why pushed it.
>>
>> Ref: https://lore.kernel.org/all/amDbGHRbObX-lt5F@SMW015318/
> 
> You can fix the order by using prep patch, which just fix order, typo
> or some cleanup.
> 
> But not mixed into new feature patches.
> 
>>
>>>> +/* AMD CPM6 (Xilinx) supported cap */
>>>> +#define DW_PCIE_XILINX_CPM6_VSEC_CH_SEP		GENMASK(18, 16)
>>>>    #define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_WR_CH	GENMASK(9, 0)
>>>>    #define DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_RD_CH	GENMASK(25, 16)
>>>>
>>>> @@ -73,6 +75,7 @@ struct dw_edma_pcie_data {
>>>>    	u16				wr_ch_cnt;
>>>>    	u16				rd_ch_cnt;
>>>>    	u64				devmem_phys_off;
>>>> +	u32				ch_space_sz;
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>>    static const struct dw_edma_pcie_data snps_edda_data = {
>>>> @@ -127,7 +130,7 @@ static const struct dw_edma_pcie_data xilinx_mdb_data = {
>>>>    };
>>>>
>>>>    static const struct dw_edma_pcie_data xilinx_cpm6_dma_data = {
>>>> -	/* MDB registers location */
>>>> +	/* CPM6 registers location */
>>>
>>> This typo fix have not mixed this patch.
>>
>> This is subtle change. Since the focus of this patch series is CPM6, the
>> namings and comments should align with the appropriate name.
>>

Can we take up this change along with this patch series as it is related
to CPM6 only?

>>>
>>>>    	.rg.bar				= BAR_0,
>>>>    	.rg.off				= SZ_4K,	/*  4 Kbytes */
>>>>    	.rg.sz				= SZ_8K,	/*  8 Kbytes */
>>>> @@ -189,6 +192,13 @@ static int dw_edma_pcie_irq_vector(struct device *dev, unsigned int nr)
>>>>    	return pci_irq_vector(to_pci_dev(dev), nr);
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>> +static u32 dw_edma_get_ch_space_sz(u32 val)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	if (val > 0 && val <= 7)
>>>> +		return 256 << val;
>>>> +	return 256;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>    static u64 dw_edma_pcie_address(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t cpu_addr)
>>>>    {
>>>>    	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
>>>> @@ -279,6 +289,10 @@ static void dw_edma_pcie_get_xilinx_dma_data(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>>>    	pdata->mf = map;
>>>>    	pdata->rg.bar = FIELD_GET(DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_BAR, val);
>>>>
>>>> +	if (pdev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_XILINX_B00F)
>>>> +		pdata->ch_space_sz = dw_edma_get_ch_space_sz
>>>> +					(FIELD_GET(DW_PCIE_XILINX_CPM6_VSEC_CH_SEP, val));
>>>> +
>>>>    	pci_read_config_dword(pdev, vsec + 0xc, &val);
>>>>    	pdata->wr_ch_cnt = min(pdata->wr_ch_cnt,
>>>>    			       FIELD_GET(DW_PCIE_XILINX_MDB_VSEC_DMA_WR_CH, val));
>>>> @@ -324,9 +338,9 @@ static int dw_edma_pcie_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>>>    	struct dw_edma_pcie_data *pdata = (void *)pid->driver_data;
>>>>    	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>>    	struct dw_edma_chip *chip;
>>>> +	bool non_ll = false;
>>>>    	int err, nr_irqs;
>>>>    	int i, mask;
>>>> -	bool non_ll = false;
>>>
>>> unnecssary change here
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, this change was part of some patch series I pushed.
>> This change was breaking the inverted X-mas format that's why
>> made this change.
> 
> But not related this patch. Use a small sperate patch to fix these small
> problem.
> 
> Use a small patch to do clean up, for example
> 
> reorder register bit defination
> fix commends about CPM6
> fix inverted X-mas format.
> 
The 1st and 3rd can be taken in a separate patch series but the 2nd
is related to CPM6 only so having it is beneficial with this patch
series, removes the misleading comment.

I will push the changes after your response.

-Devendra

 > > Frank
> 
>>
>> -Devendra
>>
>>> Frank
>>>>
>>>>    	if (!pdata)
>>>>    		return -ENODEV;
>>>> --
>>>> 2.43.0
>>>>
>>