From: "Alex G." <mr.nuke.me@gmail.com>
To: Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
Alex_Gagniuc@Dellteam.com, bhelgaas@google.com
Cc: Austin.Bolen@dell.com, Shyam.Iyer@dell.com,
keith.busch@intel.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Check for PCIe downtraining conditions
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 12:27:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <954892f0-196d-b11c-c2a0-e4a0e4be4b8c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <29ad2bf5-b5af-35be-3bef-2d0652aa2e33@codeaurora.org>
On 05/31/2018 12:11 PM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 5/31/2018 12:49 PM, Alex G. wrote:
>>> bw_cap = pcie_bandwidth_capable(dev, &speed_cap, &width_cap);
>>> bw_avail = pcie_bandwidth_available(dev, &limiting_dev, &speed, &width, *parent*);
>> That's confusing. I'd expect _capable() and _available() to be
>> symmetrical. They either both look at one link only, or both go down to
>> the root port. Though it seems _capable() is link-local, and
>> _available() is down to root port.
>>
>
> As you know, link speed is a qualification of two devices speed capability.
> Both speed and width parameters get negotiated by two devices during TS1 and TS2
> ordered set exchange.
>
> You need to see what your link partner can support in available function() vs.
> what this device can do in bandwidth() function.
I see. I'm not sure I can use pcie_print_link_status() without some
major refactoring. I need to look at capability of device and it
downstream port. There's no point complaining that an x16 device is
running at x4 when the port is only x4 capable.
Let me think some more on this.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-31 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-31 15:05 [PATCH] PCI: Check for PCIe downtraining conditions Alexandru Gagniuc
2018-05-31 15:28 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 15:29 ` Alex_Gagniuc
2018-05-31 15:38 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 15:46 ` Alex G.
2018-05-31 15:54 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 16:01 ` Alex G.
2018-05-31 16:13 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 16:49 ` Alex G.
2018-05-31 16:50 ` Alex G.
2018-05-31 17:11 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 17:27 ` Alex G. [this message]
2018-05-31 21:52 ` Alex G.
2018-05-31 15:30 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-05-31 21:44 ` Alex G.
2018-06-01 13:30 ` Sinan Kaya
2018-06-02 17:42 ` Pavel Machek
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=954892f0-196d-b11c-c2a0-e4a0e4be4b8c@gmail.com \
--to=mr.nuke.me@gmail.com \
--cc=Alex_Gagniuc@Dellteam.com \
--cc=Austin.Bolen@dell.com \
--cc=Shyam.Iyer@dell.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).