linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	Peter Wu <peter@lekensteyn.nl>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>,
	Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Wait for 50ms after bridge is powered up
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 12:33:26 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160530093326.GH1789@lahna.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1576190.gfFb6HhZV6@vostro.rjw.lan>

On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 02:29:06PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 02:03:08 PM Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 12:45:57PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > > > The PCI PM specification version 1.2 says this in chapter 4.2 (page 37):
> > > > 
> > > >   There is a minimum time requirement of 50 ms which must be provided by
> > > >   system software between when the bus is switched from B2 to B0 and
> > > >   when a function on the bus is accessed to allow time for the clock to
> > > >   start up and the bus to settle.
> > > 
> > > But why do we wait 50 ms when *suspending*, i.e. going from B0 to B2?
> > 
> > I guess because PCI requires delays of 10ms for both directions D0 <->
> > D3hot (see pci_raw_set_power_state()).
> > 
> > > (Assuming B2 is the state when the bridge goes to D3hot, which I'm not
> > > sure of. The spec says that the bus state may optionally be B3 if the
> > > bridge is in D3hot.)
> > 
> > B3 is the state where the bus goes when it's power is removed so I would
> > expect that to require also the 50ms even though the spec does not
> > explicitly say so.
> > 
> > > > Not sure how much of that still applies to modern hardware.
> > > 
> > > Could you ask hardware engineers at Intel what the bus state is on
> > > modern chipsets (say, ILK or newer) and Thunderbolt ports to clarify
> > > this?
> > 
> > I can try but it is not always easy to find the right person in company
> > as big as Intel.
> 
> Well, even if you find someone to tell you that, what about non-Intel?

Indeed, I was hoping to find someone who knows more about PCIe in
general and it turns out I found one :-)

> Are we going to ever know a value that's going to work for everybody unless
> that value is clearly stated in the spec?

That is a good question and the person I managed to find tells me that
the values are already in the spec.

So there are really no B-states in PCIe. Closest thing is L-states which
are defined in the PCIe spec. The spec has two timing limitations:

 - After bringing the device to D0/L0 from D3hot/L1 there is a
   required 10ms delay after the write to PMCSR before any other config
   space access (5.3.1.4 in PCIe spec 3.1a).

 - After bringing the device out of reset, which is the path to D0/L0
   from D3cold, there is a required 100ms delay before accessing the
   device's config space (6.6.1 in PCIe spec 3.1a).

I also learned that both of these can be shortened with following
mechanisms:

 - PCIe readines notifications (6.23 in PCIe spec 3.1a)
 - ACPI _DSM method returning readines durations from  (4.6.9 in PCI
   firmware spec 3.2).

I think it is actually worth looking into the two mechanisms and try to
get Linux support them.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-05-30  9:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-05-18 17:14 Rescanning is broken with runtime PM for PCIe ports Peter Wu
2016-05-19  7:42 ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-19 11:36   ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-20  8:45     ` Peter Wu
2016-05-23  8:20       ` [PATCH] PCI: Power on bridges before scanning new devices Mika Westerberg
2016-05-23 20:00         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-23 21:50           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-24 12:23             ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-24 12:52               ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-24 12:53               ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-24 14:27                 ` Peter Wu
2016-05-24 15:06                   ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-24 16:38                   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-24 23:46                     ` Peter Wu
2016-05-24 16:28                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2016-05-25 15:04                   ` [PATCH] PCI: Wait for 50ms after bridge is powered up Mika Westerberg
2016-05-25 20:44                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-05-26 10:10                     ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-26 10:25                       ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-26 10:45                         ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-26 11:03                           ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-28 12:29                             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-05-30  9:33                               ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2016-05-30 14:44                                 ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-30 15:19                                   ` Andreas Noever
2016-05-31  8:33                                     ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-31  8:58                                       ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-31 10:40                                         ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-31 10:47                                           ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-31 11:07                                             ` Lukas Wunner
2016-06-01  9:11                                               ` Mika Westerberg
2016-06-01 11:42                                                 ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-24 21:13                 ` [PATCH] PCI: Power on bridges before scanning new devices Mika Westerberg
2016-05-25  0:03                   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-05-25 13:19                   ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-25 20:45                     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-05-26  8:16                       ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-28 12:21                         ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2016-05-30  9:35                           ` Mika Westerberg
2016-05-25 12:16                 ` Lukas Wunner
2016-05-25 13:25                   ` Mika Westerberg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160530093326.GH1789@lahna.fi.intel.com \
    --to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=andreas.noever@gmail.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=peter@lekensteyn.nl \
    --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
    --cc=valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).