litepcie VS linux

Hi folks. :)

I'm so glad that my hit-and-run post has been so useful. After seeing Fabien's blog post I did a quick search and it turns out that the solution has spread fairly broadly to other forums. My choice of 0x33 was arbitrary so makes a nice canary for seeing it spread out.

My use case was (and remains) having a Xilinx Artix 7 FPGA in an external Thunderbolt 3 enclosure for testing the development of DSP accelerators using open source tooling. I didn't want to have the FPGA board inside the PC to be able to swap it to my laptop easily, because it produces a lot of heat, and so when I misused the PCIe soft core (litePCIe: https://github.com/enjoy-digital/litepcie/) it doesn't take down the OS. Being able to reload the FPGA and effectively hotplug the device has been very helpful.

Since I knew my issue was around hotplugging I searched for information around PCIe hotplugging and I think (it was two years ago...) that I found the answer from one of these two threads. Both mention the option of reserving PCIe addresses for hotplug busses as a workaround, and a workaround was all I needed.

https://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg64841.html

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/35946

dmesg and the various kernel logs are my first stop for any odd behavior on Linux. Especially with any state change to a device (plugging in, turning on, removing, reconfiguring etc) the kernel logs tend to give invaluable info.

I had already been looking at eGPU forums to choose the Thunderbolt 3 enclosure (ended up with the ORI-SCM2T3-G40-GY) and there were various discussions of hotplugging issues there, but I don't think I found the specific kernel options to fix it there.

Check out this docs page for the kernel parameters:

You could try to implement a PCIe root complex for FOSS SoCs, connecting to e.g. Wishbone as the main bus. There's already some DDR3 controller (or this one) and USB Host controller out there, and even device-side PCIe, but no FOSS host-side PCIe that I know of. Probably quite a difficult job though, even sticking to the lower-speed PCIe 1.

FFS predates FreeBSD and is in some capacity supported by all 3 major BSDs. I'm fairly confident that Linux actually supports it through the ufs driver ( https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/fs/ufs ); whether the use of different names in different places makes it better or worse is an exercise for the reader.

These are a bit easier to see what's going on:

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d5cf50dafc9dd5faa1e...

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/d5cf50dafc9dd5faa1e61...

Unfortunately Github doesn't have a way to render symbols for whitespace, but you can tell by selecting the spaces that the previous version had leading tabs. Linus changed it so that the tokens `default` and the number e.g. `12` are also separated by a tab. This is tricky, because the token "default" is seven characters, it will always give this added tab a width of 1 char which makes it always layout the same as if it were a space no matter if you use tab widths of 1, 2, 4, or 8.

There was also a Gentoo effort to run atop FreeBSD[0]. The challenge of course is that afaik none of the BSD kernel ABIs are considered stable. The stable interface is the BSD libc. That said, with binfmt_misc, I don't see a reason you couldn't just run (at least some) FreeBSD binaries on Linux with a thin syscall translation layer (rather something like qemu-system) and then your layer hooked via binfmt_misc. I'm not aware of anyone who has done this for FreeBSD, but prior efforts existed as alternate binfmts for SysVr4/5 ELF binaries[2]. Either way would take some elbow grease, but you *might* even be able just reuse binfmt_elf and just have a new interpreter for FreeBSD elf.

[0] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_FreeBSD

[1] https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/binfmt-misc.html

[2] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_elf....

> The original less-than check was deemed incorrect

It was only deemed incorrect because of an information leak. Not because it's a valid use-case for user space to copy smaller portions of *hwrpb into user space. https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/21c5977a836e399fc71...

Correct. And the combined work needs to carry the MIT license text and copyright attributions for the MIT software authors. With binary distribution it must also be overt, not hidden in some source code drop, but directly accompanying the binary.

Many people who talk about relicensing never credit the MIT developers or distribute the MIT license text. "Because it's GPL now."

I don't think that you believe that, but many developers do.

Some don't see the need for source code scans for Open Source compliance, because the license.txt says GPL, so it's GPL. Prime example is the Linux kernel. There is code under different licenses in there, but people don't even read https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/COPYING till the end ("In addition, other licenses may also apply.") and conclude it's simply GPL 2 and nothing else.

Also be aware that sublicensing is not the same as relicensing.

> Does he have something against it?

He notoriously hates GNU Emacs, yes.

https://marc.info/?m=122955159617722

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/...

So If we would only count code and not comments, it is only 9489 LoC Rust. Which would be about 0.03% and if we take all lines and not only LoC it would be around 0.05%

[0] https://github.com/XAMPPRocky/tokei

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/b401b621758e46812da...