From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: okaya@codeaurora.org (Sinan Kaya) Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 17:22:08 -0400 Subject: [PATCH V7 1/3] PCI: limit FLR wait time to 100ms maximum In-Reply-To: <20170802202735.GE20308@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> References: <1501701317-32249-1-git-send-email-okaya@codeaurora.org> <20170802202735.GE20308@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 8/2/2017 4:27 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 03:15:15PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > My hypothesis was that CRS isn't useful on VFs because of sec 2.2.2 > says "FLR ... does not affect its existence in PCI Configuration > Space". But I think that hypothesis is wrong because sec 3.3.3.1 > does talk about a VF returning CRS. > hmm, good catch. I'll drop the first patch. > The SR-IOV spec (sec 3.4.1.1) says a VF's Vendor ID is read-only > 0xffff. But I expect CRS visibility (PCIe r3.1, sec 2.3.2) would work > normally and return a Vendor ID of 0x0001 to indicate CRS for a VF. > > Of course, not all Root Ports support CRS software visibility, so > whatever we do has to work when it's absent. How about a mixture of old code and new code as follows? static void pci_flr_wait(struct pci_dev *dev) { u32 id; bool ret = false; int i = 0; if (CRS supported) { /* don't touch the HW before waiting 100ms */ msleep(100); ret = pci_bus_read_dev_vendor_id(dev->bus, dev->devfn, &id, 60000); if (ret) return; } do { msleep(100); pci_read_config_dword(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &id); } while (i++ < 10 && id == ~0); if (id == ~0) dev_warn(&dev->dev, "Failed to return from FLR\n"); else if (i > 1) dev_info(&dev->dev, "Required additional %dms to return from FLR\n", (i - 1) * 100); } -- Sinan Kaya Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.