From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@amd.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>,
"Maciej W . Rozycki" <macro@orcam.me.uk>,
"Mika Westerberg" <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>,
"Lukas Wunner" <lukas@wunner.de>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
"Duc Dang" <ducdang@google.com>,
"Alex Williamson" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"Li, Gary" <Gary.Li@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] PCI: Use Configuration RRS to wait for device ready
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 17:26:32 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab893fd1-6a90-4a39-963a-111dbdc9f720@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240828214218.GA40398@bhelgaas>
On 8/28/2024 16:42, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 04:24:01PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>> On 8/27/2024 18:48, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
>>>
>>> After a device reset, pci_dev_wait() waits for a device to become
>>> completely ready by polling the PCI_COMMAND register. The spec envisions
>>> that software would instead poll for the device to stop responding to
>>> config reads with Completions with Request Retry Status (RRS).
>>>
>>> Polling PCI_COMMAND leads to hardware retries that are invisible to
>>> software and the backoff between software retries doesn't work correctly.
>>>
>>> Root Ports are not required to support the Configuration RRS Software
>>> Visibility feature that prevents hardware retries and makes the RRS
>>> Completions visible to software, so this series only uses it when available
>>> and falls back to PCI_COMMAND polling when it's not.
>>>
>>> This is completely untested and posted for comments.
>>>
>>> Bjorn Helgaas (3):
>>> PCI: Wait for device readiness with Configuration RRS
>>> PCI: aardvark: Correct Configuration RRS checking
>>> PCI: Rename CRS Completion Status to RRS
>>>
>>> drivers/bcma/driver_pci_host.c | 10 ++--
>>> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-tegra194.c | 18 +++---
>>> drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c | 64 +++++++++++-----------
>>> drivers/pci/controller/pci-xgene.c | 6 +-
>>> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-iproc.c | 18 +++---
>>> drivers/pci/pci-bridge-emul.c | 4 +-
>>> drivers/pci/pci.c | 41 +++++++++-----
>>> drivers/pci/pci.h | 11 +++-
>>> drivers/pci/probe.c | 33 +++++------
>>> include/linux/bcma/bcma_driver_pci.h | 2 +-
>>> include/linux/pci.h | 1 +
>>> include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h | 6 +-
>>> 12 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
>>
>> Although this looks like a useful series, I'm sorry to say but this doesn't
>> solve the issue that Gary and I raised. We double checked today and found
>> that reading the vendor ID works just fine at this time.
>
> Thanks for testing that.
Sure.
>
>> I think that we're still better off polling PCI_PM_CTRL to "wait" for D0
>> after the state change from D3cold.
>
> Is there some spec justification for polling PCI_PM_CTRL? I'm dubious
> about doing that just because "it works" in this situation, unless we
> have some better understanding about *why* it works and whether all
> devices are supposed to work that way.
>
I mentioned this a little bit in my patch 3/5 in my submission. The
issue isn't "normal" D3cold exit that is fully settled down.
That takes ~6ms from measurements. The issue is how long it takes for
D3cold *entry* followed by *exit*.
When this issue occurs it's tied with a tight loop of runtime PM entry
and exit happening in that short window.
That's why it can be tripped by unplugging a dock, waiting until
~approximately autosuspend delay and plugging it back in. If you catch
the right timing then the USB4 router is still on it's way down to D3cold.
In terms of a way to match this problem to the spec, the closest I could
think is PCI-PM spec.
But I do see in the PCI-PM spec that the delay for D0->D3hot should be
10ms. In the Linux kernel implementation __pci_set_power_state() when
called with D3cold calls pci_set_low_power_state() which does wait 10ms
followed by using the platform to remove power.
I can't find any timing requirements for D3hot->D3cold transition though.
I would hypothesize that if we injected a longer delay on the "other
end" for the D3cold transition entry it would solve this issue as well
though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-28 22:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-27 23:48 [RFC PATCH 0/3] PCI: Use Configuration RRS to wait for device ready Bjorn Helgaas
2024-08-27 23:48 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] PCI: Wait for device readiness with Configuration RRS Bjorn Helgaas
2024-08-28 4:17 ` Lukas Wunner
2024-08-28 20:53 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-09-11 0:42 ` Duc Dang
2024-08-27 23:48 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] PCI: aardvark: Correct Configuration RRS checking Bjorn Helgaas
2024-08-27 23:48 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] PCI: Rename CRS Completion Status to RRS Bjorn Helgaas
2024-08-28 21:24 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] PCI: Use Configuration RRS to wait for device ready Mario Limonciello
2024-08-28 21:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-08-28 22:26 ` Mario Limonciello [this message]
2024-08-29 23:12 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-09-10 0:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2024-09-10 22:55 ` Bjorn Helgaas
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=ab893fd1-6a90-4a39-963a-111dbdc9f720@amd.com \
--to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=Gary.Li@amd.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=ducdang@google.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=macro@orcam.me.uk \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.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