All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: "Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove unncessary linked list from aspm.c
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 18:00:47 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210930230047.GA921465@bhelgaas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210929004315.22558-5-refactormyself@gmail.com>

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:43:15AM +0200, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote:
> From: "Bolarinwa O. Saheed" <refactormyself@gmail.com>
> 
> aspm.c defines a linked list - `link_list` and stores each of
> its node in struct pcie_link_state.sibling. This linked list
> tracks devices for which the struct pcie_link_state object
> was successfully created. It is used to loop through the list
> for instance to set ASPM policy or update changes. However, it
> is possible to access these devices via existing lists defined
> inside pci.h
> 
> This patch:
> - removes link_list and struct pcie_link_state.sibling
> - accesses child devices via struct pci_dev.bust_list
> - accesses all PCI buses via pci_root_buses on struct pci_bus.node

Again, I LOVE the way this is going.  I depise this extra linked list.

> Signed-off-by: Bolarinwa O. Saheed <refactormyself@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> index 56d4fe7d50b5..4bef652dc63c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> @@ -48,7 +48,6 @@ struct aspm_latency {
>  
>  struct pcie_link_state {
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev;		/* Upstream component of the Link */
> -	struct list_head sibling;	/* node in link_list */
>  
>  	/* ASPM state */
>  	u32 aspm_support:7;		/* Supported ASPM state */
> @@ -76,7 +75,6 @@ struct pcie_link_state {
>  static int aspm_disabled, aspm_force;
>  static bool aspm_support_enabled = true;
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(aspm_lock);
> -static LIST_HEAD(link_list);
>  
>  #define POLICY_DEFAULT 0	/* BIOS default setting */
>  #define POLICY_PERFORMANCE 1	/* high performance */
> @@ -880,10 +878,7 @@ static struct pcie_link_state *alloc_pcie_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>  	if (!link)
>  		return NULL;
>  
> -	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&link->sibling);
>  	link->pdev = pdev;
> -
> -	list_add(&link->sibling, &link_list);
>  	pdev->link_state = link;
>  	return link;
>  }
> @@ -970,24 +965,22 @@ static void pcie_update_aspm_capable(struct pcie_link_state *root)
>  {
>  	struct pcie_link_state *link;
>  	struct pci_dev *dev, *root_dev;
> +	struct pci_bus *rootbus = root->pdev->bus;
>  
>  	/* Ensure it is the root device */
>  	root_dev = pcie_get_root(root->pdev);
>  	root = root_dev ? root_dev->link_state : NULL;
>  
> -	list_for_each_entry(link, &link_list, sibling) {
> -		dev = pcie_get_root(link->pdev);
> -		if (dev->link_state != root)
> +	list_for_each_entry(dev, &rootbus->devices, bus_list) {
> +		if (!dev->link_state)
>  			continue;
>  
> -		link->aspm_capable = link->aspm_support;
> +		dev->link_state->aspm_capable = link->aspm_support;
>  	}
> -	list_for_each_entry(link, &link_list, sibling) {
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(dev, &rootbus->devices, bus_list) {
>  		struct pci_dev *child;
> -		struct pci_bus *linkbus = link->pdev->subordinate;
> -		dev = pcie_get_root(link->pdev);
> -		if (dev->link_state != root)
> -			continue;
> +		struct pci_bus *linkbus = dev->subordinate;
>  
>  		list_for_each_entry(child, &linkbus->devices, bus_list) {
>  			if ((pci_pcie_type(child) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_ENDPOINT) &&
> @@ -1024,7 +1017,6 @@ void pcie_aspm_exit_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>  
>  	/* All functions are removed, so just disable ASPM for the link */
>  	pcie_config_aspm_link(link, 0);
> -	list_del(&link->sibling);
>  	/* Clock PM is for endpoint device */
>  	free_link_state(link);
>  
> @@ -1164,6 +1156,8 @@ static int pcie_aspm_set_policy(const char *val,
>  {
>  	int i;
>  	struct pcie_link_state *link;
> +	struct pci_bus *bus;
> +	struct pci_dev *pdev;
>  
>  	if (aspm_disabled)
>  		return -EPERM;
> @@ -1176,9 +1170,18 @@ static int pcie_aspm_set_policy(const char *val,
>  	down_read(&pci_bus_sem);
>  	mutex_lock(&aspm_lock);
>  	aspm_policy = i;
> -	list_for_each_entry(link, &link_list, sibling) {
> -		pcie_config_aspm_link(link, policy_to_aspm_state(link));
> -		pcie_set_clkpm(link, policy_to_clkpm_state(link));
> +	list_for_each_entry(bus, &pci_root_buses, node) {
> +		list_for_each_entry(pdev, &bus->devices, bus_list) {
> +			if (!pci_is_pcie(pdev))
> +				break;
> +
> +			link = pdev->link_state;
> +			if (!link)
> +				continue;
> +
> +			pcie_config_aspm_link(link, policy_to_aspm_state(link));
> +			pcie_set_clkpm(link, policy_to_clkpm_state(link));
> +		}

IIUC, in the existing code, link_list contains *every* pcie_link_state
in the system, so we update the configuration of all of them.

Here, iterating through pci_root_buses gives us all the root buses (in
the case of multiple host bridges), and on each root bus we look at
every device that has a link_state, so those would typically be Root
Ports.  But I don't think we descend the hierarchy, so in the case of
deeper hierarchies, I don't think we update the lower levels.

Example from my laptop:

  00:1d.6 Root Port                     to [bus 06-3e]
  06:00.0 Upstream Port   (switch A)    to [bus 07-3e]
  07:01.0 Downstream Port (switch A)    to [bus 09-3d]
  09:00.0 Upstream Port   (switch B)    to [bus 0a-3d]
  0a:04.0 Downstream Port (switch B)    to [bus 0c-3d]
  0c:00.0 Upstream Port   (switch C)    to [bus 0d-3d]
  0d:01.0 Downstream Port (switch C)    to [bus 0e]
  0e:00.0 Upstream Port   (Endpoint)    USB controller

Here there are four links:

  00:1d.6 --- 06:00.0
  07:01.0 --- 09:00.0
  0a:04.0 --- 0c:00.0
  0d:01.0 --- 0e:00.0

But I think this patch only looks at the 00:1d.6 --- 06:00.0 link,
doesn't it?

>  	}
>  	mutex_unlock(&aspm_lock);
>  	up_read(&pci_bus_sem);
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-30 23:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-29  0:43 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] Remove unncessary linked list from aspm.c Saheed O. Bolarinwa
2021-09-29  0:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove struct pcie_link_state.parent Saheed O. Bolarinwa
2021-09-30 22:40   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-10-11  6:01     ` Saheed Bolarinwa
2021-09-29  0:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove struct pcie_link_state.root Saheed O. Bolarinwa
2021-09-29  0:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove struct pcie_link_state.downstream Saheed O. Bolarinwa
2021-09-29  0:43 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove unncessary linked list from aspm.c Saheed O. Bolarinwa
2021-09-30 23:00   ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2021-10-11  6:03     ` Saheed Bolarinwa

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=20210930230047.GA921465@bhelgaas \
    --to=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=refactormyself@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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.