From: "Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>
To: Ajay Agarwal <ajayagarwal@google.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@quicinc.com>,
Sajid Dalvi <sdalvi@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "PCI: dwc: Wait for link up only if link is started"
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 02:06:08 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230710170608.GA346178@rocinante> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZKw03xjH5VdL/JHD@google.com>
Hello,
> > > > > Finally, note that the intel-gw driver is the only driver currently not
> > > > > providing a start_link callback and instead starts the link in its
> > > > > host_init callback, and which may avoid an additional one-second timeout
> > > > > during probe by making the link-up wait conditional. If anyone cares,
> > > > > that can be done in a follow-up patch with a proper motivation.
> > >
> > > > The offending commit is bogus since it makes the intel-gw _special_ w.r.t
> > > > waiting for the link up. Most of the drivers call dw_pcie_host_init() during the
> > > > probe time and they all have to wait for 1 sec if the slot is empty.
> >
> > Mani, can you please explain how my commit made the intel-gw driver
> > special? The intel driver actually fails the dw_pcie_host_init if the
> > link does not come up. That was my motivation behind adding the fail
> > logic in the core driver as well.
> > >
> > > Just to clarify, the intel-gw driver starts the link and waits for link
> > > up in its host_init() callback, which is called during probe. That wait
> > > could possibly just be dropped in favour of the one in
> > > dw_pcie_host_init() and/or the driver could be reworked to implement
> > > start_link().
> > >
> > > Either way, the call in dw_pcie_host_init() will only add an additional
> > > 1 second delay in cases where the link did *not* come up.
> > >
> > > > As Johan noted, intel-gw should make use of the async probe to avoid the boot
> > > > delay instead of adding a special case.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
The whole conversation above about the intel-gw driver: would something
need to be addressed here? Or can I pick the suggested fix?
> > My apologies for adding this regression in some of the SOCs.
> > May I suggest to keep my patch and make the following change instead?
> > This shall keep the existing behavior as is, and save the boot time
> > for drivers that do not define the start_link()?
[...]
> I just realized that Fabio pushed exactly the same patch as I suggested
> here:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230704122635.1362156-1-festevam@gmail.com/.
> I think it is better we take it instead of reverting my commit.
Will do. I will also make sure that we have correct attributions in place.
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-10 17:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-06 8:26 [PATCH] Revert "PCI: dwc: Wait for link up only if link is started" Johan Hovold
2023-07-06 12:58 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2023-07-07 12:47 ` Johan Hovold
2023-07-10 16:21 ` Ajay Agarwal
2023-07-10 16:42 ` Ajay Agarwal
2023-07-10 17:06 ` Krzysztof Wilczyński [this message]
2023-07-11 6:52 ` Johan Hovold
2023-07-12 17:45 ` Ajay Agarwal
2023-07-14 8:55 ` Johan Hovold
2024-01-11 15:43 ` Ajay Agarwal
2023-07-11 7:37 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2024-01-12 10:00 ` Ajay Agarwal
2024-01-19 7:40 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2023-07-25 20:05 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-07-26 8:30 ` Johan Hovold
2023-07-26 15:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=20230710170608.GA346178@rocinante \
--to=kw@linux.com \
--cc=ajayagarwal@google.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com \
--cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
--cc=quic_bjorande@quicinc.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sdalvi@google.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).