Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavol Sakac <sakacpav@amazon.de>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"David Matlack" <dmatlack@google.com>,
	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
	"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
	"Kees Cook" <kees@kernel.org>,
	"Madhavan Srinivasan" <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	"Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@gmail.com>,
	"Christophe Leroy" <chleroy@kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	"Niklas Schnelle" <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Benjamin Block" <bblock@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Lukas Wunner" <lukas@wunner.de>,
	"Ionut Nechita" <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>,
	nh-open-source@amazon.com
Subject: [RFC PATCH 3/8] PCI/PM: Convert pci_bridge_d3_update() recursion to iteration
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 14:29:58 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911122958.88717-1-sakacpav@amazon.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260911-vfopt-s1-v1-0-693271dc0226@amazon.de>

pci_bridge_d3_update() propagates a bridge_d3 change to upstream bridges
by tail recursion: when a bridge's bridge_d3 value changes, the function
calls itself with that bridge as the new device.

Convert the tail recursion into an iterative loop. Each level recomputes
"remove" and d3cold_ok exactly as the recursive call did for its own
device, and the early returns become loop exits. No functional change
intended.

An upcoming change serializes this update with a mutex; the iterative
form lets that mutex be taken once per external call instead of once per
bridge level.

Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Pavol Sakac <sakacpav@amazon.de>
---
 drivers/pci/pci.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
index b2879a6be5f8..c62a315c0b4c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
@@ -3104,46 +3104,49 @@ static int pci_dev_check_d3cold(struct pci_dev *dev, void *data)
  */
 void pci_bridge_d3_update(struct pci_dev *dev)
 {
-	bool remove = !device_is_registered(&dev->dev);
 	struct pci_dev *bridge;
-	bool d3cold_ok = true;
 
-	bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
-	if (!bridge || !pci_bridge_d3_possible(bridge))
-		return;
+	while ((bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev)) &&
+	       pci_bridge_d3_possible(bridge)) {
+		bool remove = !device_is_registered(&dev->dev);
+		bool d3cold_ok = true;
 
-	/*
-	 * If D3 is currently allowed for the bridge, removing one of its
-	 * children won't change that.
-	 */
-	if (remove && bridge->bridge_d3)
-		return;
+		/*
+		 * If D3 is currently allowed for the bridge, removing one of
+		 * its children won't change that.
+		 */
+		if (remove && bridge->bridge_d3)
+			break;
 
-	/*
-	 * If D3 is currently allowed for the bridge and a child is added or
-	 * changed, disallowance of D3 can only be caused by that child, so
-	 * we only need to check that single device, not any of its siblings.
-	 *
-	 * If D3 is currently not allowed for the bridge, checking the device
-	 * first may allow us to skip checking its siblings.
-	 */
-	if (!remove)
-		pci_dev_check_d3cold(dev, &d3cold_ok);
+		/*
+		 * If D3 is currently allowed for the bridge and a child is
+		 * added or changed, disallowance of D3 can only be caused by
+		 * that child, so we only need to check that single device,
+		 * not any of its siblings.
+		 *
+		 * If D3 is currently not allowed for the bridge, checking the
+		 * device first may allow us to skip checking its siblings.
+		 */
+		if (!remove)
+			pci_dev_check_d3cold(dev, &d3cold_ok);
 
-	/*
-	 * If D3 is currently not allowed for the bridge, this may be caused
-	 * either by the device being changed/removed or any of its siblings,
-	 * so we need to go through all children to find out if one of them
-	 * continues to block D3.
-	 */
-	if (d3cold_ok && !bridge->bridge_d3)
-		pci_walk_bus(bridge->subordinate, pci_dev_check_d3cold,
-			     &d3cold_ok);
+		/*
+		 * If D3 is currently not allowed for the bridge, this may be
+		 * caused either by the device being changed/removed or any of
+		 * its siblings, so we need to go through all children to find
+		 * out if one of them continues to block D3.
+		 */
+		if (d3cold_ok && !bridge->bridge_d3)
+			pci_walk_bus(bridge->subordinate, pci_dev_check_d3cold,
+				     &d3cold_ok);
+
+		if (bridge->bridge_d3 == d3cold_ok)
+			break;
 
-	if (bridge->bridge_d3 != d3cold_ok) {
 		bridge->bridge_d3 = d3cold_ok;
+
 		/* Propagate change to upstream bridges */
-		pci_bridge_d3_update(bridge);
+		dev = bridge;
 	}
 }
 
-- 
2.47.3


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-11 12:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-11 12:11 [RFC PATCH 0/8] PCI/IOV: Initialize virtual functions in parallel Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:28 ` [RFC PATCH 1/8] PCI/IOV: Split virtfn bus handling out of pci_iov_add_virtfn() Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:29 ` [RFC PATCH 2/8] PCI/IOV: Create virtfn buses up front in sriov_add_vfs() Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:29 ` Pavol Sakac [this message]
2026-09-11 12:40   ` [RFC PATCH 3/8] PCI/PM: Convert pci_bridge_d3_update() recursion to iteration sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:30 ` [RFC PATCH 4/8] PCI/PM: Serialize pci_bridge_d3_update() Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:47   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:31 ` [RFC PATCH 5/8] powerpc/pci: Serialize pcibios_bus_add_device() Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:32 ` [RFC PATCH 6/8] PCI/IOV: Let sriov_add_vfs() own the failure unwind Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:52   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:33 ` [RFC PATCH 7/8] PCI/IOV: Initialize virtual functions in parallel Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:43   ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 12:34 ` [RFC PATCH 8/8] PCI: Probe inline from node-local workqueue workers Pavol Sakac
2026-09-11 12:40   ` sashiko-bot

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=20260911122958.88717-1-sakacpav@amazon.de \
    --to=sakacpav@amazon.de \
    --cc=bblock@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
    --cc=dmatlack@google.com \
    --cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=ionut.nechita@windriver.com \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=nh-open-source@amazon.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.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