Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: dwc: Wait for link up only if link is started

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 03:24:36PM +0200, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2023 at 06:05:02PM -0500, Sajid Dalvi wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:36 PM Sajid Dalvi <sdalvi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for your review Jingoo.
> > > Sajid
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 4:04 PM Han Jingoo <jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 27, 2023, Sajid Dalvi <sdalvi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > In dw_pcie_host_init() regardless of whether the link has been started
> > > > > or not, the code waits for the link to come up. Even in cases where
> > > > > start_link() is not defined the code ends up spinning in a loop for 1
> > > > > second. Since in some systems dw_pcie_host_init() gets called during
> > > > > probe, this one second loop for each pcie interface instance ends up
> > > > > extending the boot time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Call trace when start_link() is not defined:
> > > > > dw_pcie_wait_for_link << spins in a loop for 1 second
> > > > > dw_pcie_host_init
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Sajid Dalvi <sdalvi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > (CC'ed Krzysztof Kozlowski)
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > It looks good to me. I also checked the previous thread.
> > > > I agree with Krzysztof's opinion that we should include
> > > > only hardware-related features into DT.
> > > > Thank you.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Jingoo Han
> > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c | 6 +++---
> > > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > index 9952057c8819..9709f69f173e 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-host.c
> > > > > @@ -489,10 +489,10 @@ int dw_pcie_host_init(struct dw_pcie_rp *pp)
> > > > >                 ret = dw_pcie_start_link(pci);
> > > > >                 if (ret)
> > > > >                         goto err_remove_edma;
> > > > > -       }
> > > > >
> > > > > -       /* Ignore errors, the link may come up later */
> > > > > -       dw_pcie_wait_for_link(pci);
> > > > > +               /* Ignore errors, the link may come up later */
> > > > > +               dw_pcie_wait_for_link(pci);
> > > > > +       }
> > > > >
> > > > >         bridge->sysdata = pp;
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 2.39.2.722.g9855ee24e9-goog
> > > > >
> > 
> > @bhelgaas Can this be picked up in your tree:
> >  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git/
> 
> This patch seems fine to me. The question I have though is why the
> *current* code is written the way it is. Perhaps it is just the way
> it is, I wonder whether this change can trigger a regression though.

The new code will look basically like this:

  if (!dw_pcie_link_up(pci)) {
    dw_pcie_start_link(pci);
    dw_pcie_wait_for_link(pci);
  }

If the link is already up by the time we get here, this change means
we won't get this message emitted by dw_pcie_wait_for_link():

  dev_info(pci->dev, "PCIe Gen.%u x%u link up\n", ...)

I don't know how important that is, but I bet somebody cares about it.

>From the commit log, I expected the patch to do something based on
whether ->start_link() was defined, but there really isn't a direct
connection, so maybe the log could be refined.

Bjorn