From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
To: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
Cc: tjoseph@cadence.com, lpieralisi@kernel.org, robh@kernel.org,
kw@linux.com, bhelgaas@google.com, nadeem@cadence.com,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, vigneshr@ti.com,
srk@ti.com, nm@ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] PCI: cadence: Fix Gen2 Link Retraining process
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2023 11:27:37 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230609055737.GA6847@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <67865af6-7ea4-63e3-6c35-4cd038f36af3@ti.com>
On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 09:46:20AM +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> Hello Mani,
>
> Thank you for reviewing this patch.
>
> On 08/06/23 21:12, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 02:44:27PM +0530, Siddharth Vadapalli wrote:
> >> The Link Retraining process is initiated to account for the Gen2 defect in
> >> the Cadence PCIe controller in J721E SoC. The errata corresponding to this
> >> is i2085, documented at:
> >> https://www.ti.com/lit/er/sprz455c/sprz455c.pdf
> >>
> >> The existing workaround implemented for the errata waits for the Data Link
> >> initialization to complete and assumes that the link retraining process
> >> at the Physical Layer has completed. However, it is possible that the
> >> Physical Layer training might be ongoing as indicated by the
> >> PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT bit in the PCI_EXP_LNKSTA register.
> >>
> >> Fix the existing workaround, to ensure that the Physical Layer training
> >> has also completed, in addition to the Data Link initialization.
> >>
> >
> > cdns_pcie_host_wait_for_link() function is called even for the non-quirky cases
> > as well, so does this patch. But if your patch is only targeting the link
> > retraining case, you should move the logic to cdns_pcie_retrain().
>
> In the v2 version of this patch at:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230315070800.1615527-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com/
> I had implemented it as suggested above by you. However, based on the discussion
> with Bjorn at:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230509182416.GA1259841@bhelgaas/
> it was agreed upon that waiting for two things in succession doesn't seem to be
> the best way to implement it. Therefore, the cdns_pcie_host_training_complete()
> function in the v2 patch is merged into the cdns_pcie_host_wait_for_link()
> function in this patch.
>
I think Bjorn's point was to make the wait_for_link() behavior same across
drivers. While I agree with that, I'd like to know whether adding this wait for
all cases (not just during link retraining quirk) adds up any latency or not.
Can you measure that?
> >
> >
> >> Fixes: 4740b969aaf5 ("PCI: cadence: Retrain Link to work around Gen2 training defect")
> >> Signed-off-by: Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@ti.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> This patch is based on linux-next tagged next-20230606.
> >>
> >> v2:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230315070800.1615527-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com/
> >> Changes since v2:
> >> - Merge the cdns_pcie_host_training_complete() function with the
> >> cdns_pcie_host_wait_for_link() function, as suggested by Bjorn
> >> for the v2 patch.
> >> - Add dev_err() to notify when Link Training fails, since this is a
> >> fatal error and proceeding from this point will almost always crash
> >> the kernel.
> >>
> >> v1:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230102075656.260333-1-s-vadapalli@ti.com/
> >> Changes since v1:
> >> - Collect Reviewed-by tag from Vignesh Raghavendra.
> >> - Rebase on next-20230315.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Siddharth.
> >>
> >> .../controller/cadence/pcie-cadence-host.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/cadence/pcie-cadence-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/cadence/pcie-cadence-host.c
> >> index 940c7dd701d6..70a5f581ff4f 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/cadence/pcie-cadence-host.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/cadence/pcie-cadence-host.c
> >> @@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
> >>
> >> #include "pcie-cadence.h"
> >>
> >> +#define LINK_RETRAIN_TIMEOUT HZ
> >> +
> >> static u64 bar_max_size[] = {
> >> [RP_BAR0] = _ULL(128 * SZ_2G),
> >> [RP_BAR1] = SZ_2G,
> >> @@ -80,8 +82,26 @@ static struct pci_ops cdns_pcie_host_ops = {
> >> static int cdns_pcie_host_wait_for_link(struct cdns_pcie *pcie)
> >> {
> >> struct device *dev = pcie->dev;
> >> + unsigned long end_jiffies;
> >> + u16 link_status;
> >> int retries;
> >>
> >> + /* Wait for link training to complete */
> >> + end_jiffies = jiffies + LINK_RETRAIN_TIMEOUT;
> >> + do {
> >> + link_status = cdns_pcie_rp_readw(pcie, CDNS_PCIE_RP_CAP_OFFSET + PCI_EXP_LNKSTA);
> >> + if (!(link_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT))
> >> + break;
> >> + usleep_range(0, 1000);
> >> + } while (time_before(jiffies, end_jiffies));
> >> +
> >> + if (!(link_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT)) {
> >> + dev_info(dev, "Link training complete\n");
> >
> > This info is not needed.
>
> Sure. I will drop it in the v4 patch.
>
> >
> >> + } else {
> >> + dev_err(dev, "Fatal! Link training incomplete\n");
> >
> > This could be, "Link retraining incomplete".
>
> I added the word "Fatal" since Linux is almost always guaranteed to crash if the
> link training doesn't complete before the PCI subsystem attempts to enumerate
> the EP devices. Therefore, adding the word "Fatal" will help the users identify
> what the cause of the crash is, which would otherwise be overlooked, unless the
> critical nature of this error is conveyed to the user.
>
Ok.
- Mani
> >
> > - Mani
> >
> >> + return -ETIMEDOUT;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> /* Check if the link is up or not */
> >> for (retries = 0; retries < LINK_WAIT_MAX_RETRIES; retries++) {
> >> if (cdns_pcie_link_up(pcie)) {
> >> --
> >> 2.25.1
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Regards,
> Siddharth.
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-09 5:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-07 9:14 [PATCH v3] PCI: cadence: Fix Gen2 Link Retraining process Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-07 10:23 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-06-08 4:01 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-08 9:44 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-06-08 9:53 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-08 15:42 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2023-06-09 4:16 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-09 5:57 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam [this message]
2023-06-09 6:29 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-09 16:10 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2023-06-09 17:39 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-06-12 4:26 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
2023-06-12 8:29 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2023-06-12 9:06 ` Siddharth Vadapalli
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=20230609055737.GA6847@thinkpad \
--to=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kw@linux.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=nadeem@cadence.com \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=s-vadapalli@ti.com \
--cc=srk@ti.com \
--cc=tjoseph@cadence.com \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
/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).