#include "cxl.h"
#include "trace.h"
-static int afu_control(struct cxl_afu *afu, u64 command,
+static int afu_control(struct cxl_afu *afu, u64 command, u64 clear,
u64 result, u64 mask, bool enabled)
{
- u64 AFU_Cntl = cxl_p2n_read(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An);
+ u64 AFU_Cntl;
unsigned long timeout = jiffies + (HZ * CXL_TIMEOUT);
int rc = 0;
trace_cxl_afu_ctrl(afu, command);
- cxl_p2n_write(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An, AFU_Cntl | command);
+ AFU_Cntl = cxl_p2n_read(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An);
+ cxl_p2n_write(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An, (AFU_Cntl & ~clear) | command);
AFU_Cntl = cxl_p2n_read(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An);
while ((AFU_Cntl & mask) != result) {
{
pr_devel("AFU enable request\n");
- return afu_control(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_E,
+ return afu_control(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_E, 0,
CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_Enabled,
CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_MASK, true);
}
{
pr_devel("AFU disable request\n");
- return afu_control(afu, 0, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_Disabled,
+ return afu_control(afu, 0, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_E,
+ CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_Disabled,
CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_MASK, false);
}
{
pr_devel("AFU reset request\n");
- return afu_control(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_RA,
+ return afu_control(afu, CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_RA, 0,
CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_RS_Complete | CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_Disabled,
CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_RS_MASK | CXL_AFU_Cntl_An_ES_MASK,
false);
cxl_sysfs_afu_m_remove(afu);
cxl_chardev_afu_remove(afu);
- cxl_ops->afu_reset(afu);
+ /*
+ * The CAIA section 2.2.1 indicates that the procedure for starting and
+ * stopping an AFU in AFU directed mode is AFU specific, which is not
+ * ideal since this code is generic and with one exception has no
+ * knowledge of the AFU. This is in contrast to the procedure for
+ * disabling a dedicated process AFU, which is documented to just
+ * require a reset. The architecture does indicate that both an AFU
+ * reset and an AFU disable should result in the AFU being disabled and
+ * we do both followed by a PSL purge for safety.
+ *
+ * Notably we used to have some issues with the disable sequence on PSL
+ * cards, which is why we ended up using this heavy weight procedure in
+ * the first place, however a bug was discovered that had rendered the
+ * disable operation ineffective, so it is conceivable that was the
+ * sole explanation for those difficulties. Careful regression testing
+ * is recommended if anyone attempts to remove or reorder these
+ * operations.
+ *
+ * The XSL on the Mellanox CX4 behaves a little differently from the
+ * PSL based cards and will time out an AFU reset if the AFU is still
+ * enabled. That card is special in that we do have a means to identify
+ * it from this code, so in that case we skip the reset and just use a
+ * disable/purge to avoid the timeout and corresponding noise in the
+ * kernel log.
+ */
+ if (afu->adapter->native->sl_ops->needs_reset_before_disable)
+ cxl_ops->afu_reset(afu);
cxl_afu_disable(afu);
cxl_psl_purge(afu);
static inline int detach_process_native_dedicated(struct cxl_context *ctx)
{
+ /*
+ * The CAIA section 2.1.1 indicates that we need to do an AFU reset to
+ * stop the AFU in dedicated mode (we therefore do not make that
+ * optional like we do in the afu directed path). It does not indicate
+ * that we need to do an explicit disable (which should occur
+ * implicitly as part of the reset) or purge, but we do these as well
+ * to be on the safe side.
+ *
+ * Notably we used to have some issues with the disable sequence
+ * (before the sequence was spelled out in the architecture) which is
+ * why we were so heavy weight in the first place, however a bug was
+ * discovered that had rendered the disable operation ineffective, so
+ * it is conceivable that was the sole explanation for those
+ * difficulties. Point is, we should be careful and do some regression
+ * testing if we ever attempt to remove any part of this procedure.
+ */
cxl_ops->afu_reset(ctx->afu);
cxl_afu_disable(ctx->afu);
cxl_psl_purge(ctx->afu);