From: Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@nvidia.com>
To: "Thierry Reding" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
"Krzysztof Wilczyński" <kwilczynski@kernel.org>,
"Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@kernel.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Jonathan Hunter" <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
"open list:PCI DRIVER FOR NVIDIA TEGRA"
<linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:PCI DRIVER FOR NVIDIA TEGRA"
<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Anand Moon" <linux.amoon@gmail.com>
Cc: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 2/2] PCI: tegra: Use readl_poll_timeout() for link status polling
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 12:14:44 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <23013855.EfDdHjke4D@senjougahara> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250831190055.7952-3-linux.amoon@gmail.com>
On Monday, September 1, 2025 4:00 AM Anand Moon wrote:
> Replace the manual `do-while` polling loops with the readl_poll_timeout()
> helper when checking the link DL_UP and DL_LINK_ACTIVE status bits
> during link bring-up. This simplifies the code by removing the open-coded
> timeout logic in favor of the standard, more robust iopoll framework.
> The change improves readability and reduces code duplication.
>
> Cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c | 38 ++++++++++++------------------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c
> index 3841489198b64..8e850f7c84e40 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-tegra.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> #include <linux/irqchip/chained_irq.h>
> #include <linux/irqchip/irq-msi-lib.h>
> #include <linux/irqdomain.h>
> +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
There is already an iopoll.h include in this file, so this adds a duplicate.
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/init.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> @@ -2157,37 +2158,28 @@ static bool tegra_pcie_port_check_link(struct tegra_pcie_port *port)
> value |= RP_PRIV_MISC_PRSNT_MAP_EP_PRSNT;
> writel(value, port->base + RP_PRIV_MISC);
>
> - do {
> - unsigned int timeout = TEGRA_PCIE_LINKUP_TIMEOUT;
> -
> - do {
> - value = readl(port->base + RP_VEND_XP);
> -
> - if (value & RP_VEND_XP_DL_UP)
> - break;
> -
> - usleep_range(1000, 2000);
> - } while (--timeout);
> + while (retries--) {
> + int err;
>
> - if (!timeout) {
> + err = readl_poll_timeout(port->base + RP_VEND_XP, value,
> + value & RP_VEND_XP_DL_UP,
> + 1000,
> + TEGRA_PCIE_LINKUP_TIMEOUT * 1000);
The logic change here looks OK to me. This makes the timeout 200ms (TEGRA_PCIE_LINKUP_TIMEOUT is 200). Previously, the code looped 200 times with a 1 to 2ms sleep on each iteration. So the timeout could have been longer than 200ms previously, but not in a way that could be relied on.
> + if (err) {
> dev_dbg(dev, "link %u down, retrying\n", port->index);
> goto retry;
> }
>
> - timeout = TEGRA_PCIE_LINKUP_TIMEOUT;
> -
> - do {
> - value = readl(port->base + RP_LINK_CONTROL_STATUS);
> -
> - if (value & RP_LINK_CONTROL_STATUS_DL_LINK_ACTIVE)
> - return true;
> -
> - usleep_range(1000, 2000);
> - } while (--timeout);
> + err = readl_poll_timeout(port->base + RP_LINK_CONTROL_STATUS,
> + value,
> + value & RP_LINK_CONTROL_STATUS_DL_LINK_ACTIVE,
> + 1000, TEGRA_PCIE_LINKUP_TIMEOUT * 1000);
> + if (!err)
> + return true;
>
> retry:
> tegra_pcie_port_reset(port);
> - } while (--retries);
> + }
>
> return false;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-17 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-31 19:00 [RFC v1 0/2] PCI: tegra: A couple of cleanups Anand Moon
2025-08-31 19:00 ` [RFC v1 1/2] PCI: tegra: Simplify clock handling by using clk_bulk*() functions Anand Moon
2025-09-17 13:44 ` Jon Hunter
2025-09-17 18:26 ` Anand Moon
2025-09-18 9:17 ` Jon Hunter
2025-09-18 15:06 ` Anand Moon
2025-09-18 16:46 ` Jon Hunter
2025-08-31 19:00 ` [RFC v1 2/2] PCI: tegra: Use readl_poll_timeout() for link status polling Anand Moon
2025-09-17 3:14 ` Mikko Perttunen [this message]
2025-09-17 7:45 ` Anand Moon
2025-09-18 1:25 ` Mikko Perttunen
2025-09-18 4:20 ` Anand Moon
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=23013855.EfDdHjke4D@senjougahara \
--to=mperttunen@nvidia.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux.amoon@gmail.com \
--cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=thierry.reding@gmail.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