From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com>
Cc: "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
"Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@kernel.org>,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Chen-Yu Tsai" <wens@kernel.org>,
"Brian Norris" <briannorris@chromium.org>,
"Krishna Chaitanya Chundru" <krishna.chundru@oss.qualcomm.com>,
"Niklas Cassel" <cassel@kernel.org>,
"Alex Elder" <elder@riscstar.com>,
"Chen-Yu Tsai" <wenst@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PCI: qcom: Parse PERST# from all PCIe bridge nodes
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2025 17:24:58 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251226232458.GA4146464@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251216-pci-pwrctrl-rework-v2-1-745a563b9be6@oss.qualcomm.com>
On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 06:21:43PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> Devicetree schema allows the PERST# GPIO to be present in all PCIe bridge
> nodes, not just in Root Port node. But the current logic parses PERST# only
> from the Root Port nodes. Though it is not causing any issue on the current
> platforms, the upcoming platforms will have PERST# in PCIe switch
> downstream ports also. So this requires parsing all the PCIe bridge nodes
> for the PERST# GPIO.
>
> Hence, rework the parsing logic to extend to all PCIe bridge nodes starting
> from the Root Port node. If the 'reset-gpios' property is found for a PCI
> bridge node, the GPIO descriptor will be stored in qcom_pcie_perst::desc
> and added to the qcom_pcie_port::perst list.
> static void qcom_perst_assert(struct qcom_pcie *pcie, bool assert)
> {
> + struct qcom_pcie_perst *perst;
> struct qcom_pcie_port *port;
> int val = assert ? 1 : 0;
>
> - list_for_each_entry(port, &pcie->ports, list)
> - gpiod_set_value_cansleep(port->reset, val);
> + list_for_each_entry(port, &pcie->ports, list) {
> + list_for_each_entry(perst, &port->perst, list)
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(perst->desc, val);
> + }
>
> usleep_range(PERST_DELAY_US, PERST_DELAY_US + 500);
> }
> @@ -1702,18 +1710,58 @@ static const struct pci_ecam_ops pci_qcom_ecam_ops = {
> }
> };
>
> -static int qcom_pcie_parse_port(struct qcom_pcie *pcie, struct device_node *node)
> +/* Parse PERST# from all nodes in depth first manner starting from @np */
> +static int qcom_pcie_parse_perst(struct qcom_pcie *pcie,
> + struct qcom_pcie_port *port,
> + struct device_node *np)
> {
> struct device *dev = pcie->pci->dev;
> - struct qcom_pcie_port *port;
> + struct qcom_pcie_perst *perst;
> struct gpio_desc *reset;
> - struct phy *phy;
> int ret;
>
> - reset = devm_fwnode_gpiod_get(dev, of_fwnode_handle(node),
> - "reset", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH, "PERST#");
> - if (IS_ERR(reset))
> + if (!of_find_property(np, "reset-gpios", NULL))
> + goto parse_child_node;
> +
> + reset = devm_fwnode_gpiod_get(dev, of_fwnode_handle(np), "reset",
> + GPIOD_OUT_HIGH, "PERST#");
> + if (IS_ERR(reset)) {
> + /*
> + * FIXME: GPIOLIB currently supports exclusive GPIO access only.
> + * Non exclusive access is broken. But shared PERST# requires
> + * non-exclusive access. So once GPIOLIB properly supports it,
> + * implement it here.
> + */
> + if (PTR_ERR(reset) == -EBUSY)
> + dev_err(dev, "Shared PERST# is not supported\n");
> +
> return PTR_ERR(reset);
> + }
> +
> + perst = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*perst), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!perst)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&perst->list);
> + perst->desc = reset;
> + list_add_tail(&perst->list, &port->perst);
> +
> +parse_child_node:
> + for_each_available_child_of_node_scoped(np, child) {
> + ret = qcom_pcie_parse_perst(pcie, port, child);
It looks like the perst->list will be ordered by distance from the
root, i.e., a Root Port first, followed by downstream devices?
And qcom_perst_assert() will assert/deassert PERST# in that same
order? Intuitively I would have expected that if there are multiple
PERST# signals, we would assert them bottom-up, and deassert them
top-down. Does the order matter?
I suppose maybe you plan to enhance pwrctrl so it can assert/deassert
individual PERST# in the hierarchy?
I'm confused about qcom_perst_assert() because it's only called from
qcom_ep_reset_assert() and qcom_ep_reset_deassert(), which are only
called from qcom_pcie_assert_perst(). Seems like a mix of host and
endpoint situation. I assumed pwrctrl would be used on the host.
Maybe the "_ep_" names are not quite right? Or more likely I'm just
misunderstanding the plan.
I notice you'd only applied this patch (1/5) so far on
pci/controller/dwc-qcom. Is this patch useful by itself?
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-26 23:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-16 12:51 [PATCH v2 0/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Major rework to integrate pwrctrl devices with controller drivers Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-16 12:51 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] PCI: qcom: Parse PERST# from all PCIe bridge nodes Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-26 23:24 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2025-12-27 4:42 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-16 12:51 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Add 'struct pci_pwrctrl::power_{on/off}' callbacks Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-16 12:51 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Add APIs for explicitly creating and destroying pwrctrl devices Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-16 12:51 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Add APIs to power on/off the " Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-16 12:51 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Switch to the new pwrctrl APIs Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-19 18:35 ` Sean Anderson
2025-12-23 14:11 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-26 23:07 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-12-27 4:44 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-18 6:13 ` (subset) [PATCH v2 0/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Major rework to integrate pwrctrl devices with controller drivers Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-12-19 17:19 ` Sean Anderson
2025-12-19 17:22 ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/pwrctrl: Bind a pwrctrl device if clocks are present Sean Anderson
2025-12-19 17:22 ` [PATCH 2/3] PCI/pwrctrl: Add appropriate delays for slot power/clocks Sean Anderson
2025-12-19 17:22 ` [PATCH 3/3] PCI/pwrctrl: Support PERST GPIO in slot driver Sean Anderson
2026-01-02 9:52 ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/pwrctrl: Bind a pwrctrl device if clocks are present Bartosz Golaszewski
2025-12-23 14:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] PCI/pwrctrl: Major rework to integrate pwrctrl devices with controller drivers Manivannan Sadhasivam
2026-01-05 15:01 ` Sean Anderson
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=20251226232458.GA4146464@bhelgaas \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=brgl@kernel.org \
--cc=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=elder@riscstar.com \
--cc=krishna.chundru@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=wens@kernel.org \
--cc=wenst@chromium.org \
/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