Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] PCI: Use standard wait times for PCIe link monitoring

[Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>]

On Wed, May 27, 2026 at 10:28:51AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 01:10:39PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 10:53:11AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > Instead of defining the wait values for each driver, use common values
> > > defined in the core pci.h header file. Note that most drivers don't use
> > > the millisecond waits, but rather usleep_range(), so add these commonly
> > > used values to the header so that all drivers can use them.
> > 
> > Hm, why not just replace usleep_range() with msleep() and use the existing
> > macro instead of defining new ones?
> 
> I'm trying to somewhat unify the implementations across drivers without
> changing behaviour. I don't have a way of testing any of these drivers,
> so keeping the existing implementation and just switching out the symbol
> seemed like a good compromise.

It looks like the code was copy-pasted from one driver to the next
and I applaud every effort to deduplicate, unify and simplify things.

I don't quite see how using msleep() instead of usleep_range()
should result in breakage.  The drivers are just polling for
link up for an amount of time and as long as you're not decreasing
that amount, everything ought to be fine.  Moving to msleep()
should never decrease the amount.

> Then again, I count 2 drivers (in linux-next) that use the existing
> PCIE_LINK_WAIT_SLEEP_MS, one of which multiplies by MILLI to get at the
> US version (so it could easily be converted to the US_MIN version). Only
> pcie-designware.c uses msleep() with PCIE_LINK_WAIT_SLEEP_MS, so it is
> clearly the outlier.

Konrad Dybcio went ahead and replaced usleep_range() with msleep()
in that driver, kudos to him.  Cf. b262518262f5 ("PCI: dwc: Use msleep()
in dw_pcie_wait_for_link()").  If you could just carry over that change
to the other drivers that would be great.

Thanks,

Lukas