From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
Cc: "Niklas Cassel" <cassel@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kw@linux.com>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Heiko Stuebner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
"Wilfred Mallawa" <wilfred.mallawa@wdc.com>,
"Damien Le Moal" <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
"Hans Zhang" <18255117159@163.com>,
"Laszlo Fiat" <laszlo.fiat@proton.me>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI: dw-rockchip: Do not enumerate bus before endpoint devices are ready
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 12:19:37 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250530171937.GA198252@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fbvatgydh64wr2z2srivbuurjonxpq46xie3bq57grtosesfti@v6vplhyxc343>
On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 09:29:57PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 05:42:51PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 09:39:36AM +0200, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> > > Commit ec9fd499b9c6 ("PCI: dw-rockchip: Don't wait for link since we can
> > > detect Link Up") changed so that we no longer call dw_pcie_wait_for_link(),
> > > and instead enumerate the bus when receiving a Link Up IRQ.
> > >
> > > Laszlo Fiat reported (off-list) that his PLEXTOR PX-256M8PeGN NVMe SSD is
> > > no longer functional, and simply reverting commit ec9fd499b9c6 ("PCI:
> > > dw-rockchip: Don't wait for link since we can detect Link Up") makes his
> > > SSD functional again.
> > >
> > > It seems that we are enumerating the bus before the endpoint is ready.
> > > Adding a msleep(PCIE_T_RRS_READY_MS) before enumerating the bus in the
> > > threaded IRQ handler makes the SSD functional once again.
> >
> > This sounds like a problem that could happen with any controller, not
> > just dw-rockchip? Are we missing some required delay that should be
> > in generic code? Or is this a PLEXTOR defect that everybody has to
> > pay the price for?
> >
> > Delays like this are really hard to get rid of once we add them, so
> > I'm a little bit cautious.
>
> Ok, I digged into the spec a little more and I could see below
> paragraph in r6.0, sec 6.6.1 for devices not supporting Device
> Readiness Status (DRS):
>
> "With a Downstream Port that does not support Link speeds greater
> than 5.0 GT/s, software must wait a minimum of 100 ms following exit
> from a Conventional Reset before sending a Configuration Request to
> the device immediately below that Port.
>
> With a Downstream Port that supports Link speeds greater than 5.0
> GT/s, software must wait a minimum of 100 ms after Link training
> completes before sending a Configuration Request to the device
> immediately below that Port. Software can determine when Link
> training completes by polling the Data Link Layer Link Active bit or
> by setting up an associated interrupt (see § Section 6.7.3.3 ). It
> is strongly recommended for software to use this mechanism whenever
> the Downstream Port supports it."
>
> We are not checking for DRS after the PERST# deassert or after link
> is up, I think DRS check only applies to enumerated devices, but I'm
> not 100% sure. But if we assume that the devices doesn't support
> DRS, then we should make sure that all controller drivers wait for
> 100ms even after link up event before issuing the config request.
I don't think we have any DRS support yet.
I think all drivers should wait PCIE_T_RRS_READY_MS (100ms) after exit
from Conventional Reset (if port only supports <= 5.0 GT/s) or after
link training completes (if port supports > 5.0 GT/s).
> So I don't think this is a device specific issue but rather
> controller specific. And this makes the Qcom patch that I dropped a
> valid one (ofc with change in description).
URL?
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-30 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-06 7:39 [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: dwc: Link Up IRQ fixes Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 7:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI: dw-rockchip: Do not enumerate bus before endpoint devices are ready Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 11:32 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-06 22:23 ` Wilfred Mallawa
2025-05-28 22:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-05-30 13:57 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-30 15:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-05-30 15:59 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-30 17:19 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2025-05-30 17:24 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-30 19:43 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-05-31 6:47 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-06-03 14:08 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-06-03 18:12 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-04 11:40 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-06-04 17:10 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-06-04 18:44 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-05 12:28 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-06-05 13:22 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-06-05 19:27 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-05-06 7:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI: qcom: " Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 10:11 ` Krishna Chaitanya Chundru
2025-05-06 11:29 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-06 22:24 ` Wilfred Mallawa
2025-05-06 7:39 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] PCI: dw-rockchip: Replace PERST sleep time with proper macro Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 9:07 ` Hans Zhang
2025-05-06 11:36 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-06 22:24 ` Wilfred Mallawa
2025-05-06 7:39 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] PCI: qcom: " Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 9:07 ` Hans Zhang
2025-05-06 10:12 ` Krishna Chaitanya Chundru
2025-05-06 11:37 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-06 22:25 ` Wilfred Mallawa
2025-05-06 14:33 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: dwc: Link Up IRQ fixes Niklas Cassel
2025-05-06 14:51 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-13 10:53 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-13 14:07 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-15 17:33 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-16 10:00 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-16 18:48 ` Laszlo Fiat
2025-05-19 9:44 ` Niklas Cassel
2025-05-19 12:10 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-05-19 12:37 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
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=20250530171937.GA198252@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=18255117159@163.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=kw@linux.com \
--cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
--cc=laszlo.fiat@proton.me \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=wilfred.mallawa@wdc.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).