From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7549C04E69 for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229636AbjHBRSL (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2023 13:18:11 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42360 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229589AbjHBRSJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Aug 2023 13:18:09 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A51A115; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 10:18:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6DC761A5A; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E7566C433C7; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1690996687; bh=qJVS/MyovGp0njFcdDio0zeaKfQmajYUo0hUpLr3zug=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=lHuOI2fTGIXIuZ1SL3KxRDlSR0E3MuGCM5TgYQuc/gA5xgAXmpM0mylpfdTeQdmBV sYCYAe4leNk/mz9SiwLR/E1euI3UeUBlj4aib8QG9tGd9Tl385azMFcZQ57s+1tSZw S3hXxeN45xKzCmjjwlv2DaXCJ04pbscDor7X0nc2HlCnbjoOG15XqOZq11FL5X3awt rRka4Rqjyi9L4DDfhzXHrIn6eD9PiSwM2UGdxLAgJM9I+BdLoooTBwi9s2xZyy9+1Z 3p7HjkSP+MXpka4tlTOUod0aDToksOXPMYo8hKphO0EnRJTypbLciXHB57W7srg7Ha kVZsFwb1VbVEQ== Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 12:18:05 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Kevin Xie Cc: Minda Chen , Daire McNamara , Conor Dooley , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Emil Renner Berthing , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Philipp Zabel , Mason Huo , Leyfoon Tan , Mika Westerberg , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= , Marek =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beh=FAn?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/9] PCI: PLDA: starfive: Add JH7110 PCIe controller Message-ID: <20230802171805.GA62238@bhelgaas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <79e417ee-ef47-3e4b-6b51-bd7f10ac3643@starfivetech.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 03:05:46PM +0800, Kevin Xie wrote: > On 2023/8/1 7:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > ... > > The delay required by sec 6.6.1 is a minimum of 100ms following exit > > from reset or, for fast links, 100ms after link training completes. > > > > The comment at the call of advk_pcie_wait_for_link() [2] says it is > > the delay required by sec 6.6.1, but that doesn't seem right to me. > > > > For one thing, I don't think 6.6.1 says anything about "link up" being > > the end of a delay. So if we want to do the delay required by 6.6.1, > > "wait_for_link()" doesn't seem like quite the right name. > > > > For another, all the *_wait_for_link() functions can return success > > after 0ms, 90ms, 180ms, etc. They're unlikely to return after 0ms, > > but 90ms is quite possible. If we avoided the 0ms return and > > LINK_WAIT_USLEEP_MIN were 100ms instead of 90ms, that should be enough > > for slow links, where we need 100ms following "exit from reset." > > > > But it's still not enough for fast links where we need 100ms "after > > link training completes" because we don't know when training > > completed. If training completed 89ms into *_wait_for_link(), we only > > delay 1ms after that. > > That's the point, we will add a extra 100ms after PERST# de-assert > in the patch-v3 according to Base Spec r6.0 - 6.6.1: > msleep(100); > gpiod_set_value_cansleep(pcie->reset_gpio, 0); > > + /* As the requirement in PCIe base spec r6.0, system must wait a > + * minimum of 100 ms following exit from a Conventional Reset > + * before sending a Configuration Request to the device.*/ > + msleep(100); > + > if (starfive_pcie_host_wait_for_link(pcie)) > return -EIO; For fast links (links that support > 5.0 GT/s), the 100ms starts *after* link training completes. The above looks OK if starfive only supports slow links, but then I'm not sure why we would need starfive_pcie_host_wait_for_link(). Bjorn From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02866C04A6A for ; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:14 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID: Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:References: List-Owner; bh=D6BlHheBiLmK5vGQalYz0f2zcwIkXYmAgR6OmWr3vl8=; b=Qkbp0ansm7z3kk EYInqUDmf7JeFyUCWNdJj6HkPVR/elBSvlxmMvI/FRl65qMeC62IUSVOPEhC9pHenmM6fC1RzLXeu 469sBLPhMJR34JGVPdmzNOaWsE7NZMC4ZqI4HeGYGC7HSz+WTaz73QMs9TVGU96dGLW9uta/TTevS vWarHBOUJr6kOMiX3C4KOk1rKW7TNh7OthocsEoNGDSzDwe5xKXXAz27aa2JIanbyYS/jjxkVwF0k Wup/250d05KQSAXvU1ALZqeRIH4lNshXJkIERGbdfI7thzQVRFUWyxbrSMn3RSrVyzjKTQD4O2H4q jwH8rViUknkR8nXlaYkA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qRFUB-005Tpz-1d; Wed, 02 Aug 2023 17:18:11 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([139.178.84.217]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.96 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1qRFU8-005TpE-20 for linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 02 Aug 2023 17:18:09 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D62AE61A41; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E7566C433C7; Wed, 2 Aug 2023 17:18:06 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1690996687; bh=qJVS/MyovGp0njFcdDio0zeaKfQmajYUo0hUpLr3zug=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=lHuOI2fTGIXIuZ1SL3KxRDlSR0E3MuGCM5TgYQuc/gA5xgAXmpM0mylpfdTeQdmBV sYCYAe4leNk/mz9SiwLR/E1euI3UeUBlj4aib8QG9tGd9Tl385azMFcZQ57s+1tSZw S3hXxeN45xKzCmjjwlv2DaXCJ04pbscDor7X0nc2HlCnbjoOG15XqOZq11FL5X3awt rRka4Rqjyi9L4DDfhzXHrIn6eD9PiSwM2UGdxLAgJM9I+BdLoooTBwi9s2xZyy9+1Z 3p7HjkSP+MXpka4tlTOUod0aDToksOXPMYo8hKphO0EnRJTypbLciXHB57W7srg7Ha kVZsFwb1VbVEQ== Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2023 12:18:05 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Kevin Xie Cc: Minda Chen , Daire McNamara , Conor Dooley , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Emil Renner Berthing , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Philipp Zabel , Mason Huo , Leyfoon Tan , Mika Westerberg , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= , Marek =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beh=FAn?= Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/9] PCI: PLDA: starfive: Add JH7110 PCIe controller Message-ID: <20230802171805.GA62238@bhelgaas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <79e417ee-ef47-3e4b-6b51-bd7f10ac3643@starfivetech.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20230802_101808_744329_30A386E8 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 25.43 ) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 03:05:46PM +0800, Kevin Xie wrote: > On 2023/8/1 7:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > ... > > The delay required by sec 6.6.1 is a minimum of 100ms following exit > > from reset or, for fast links, 100ms after link training completes. > > > > The comment at the call of advk_pcie_wait_for_link() [2] says it is > > the delay required by sec 6.6.1, but that doesn't seem right to me. > > > > For one thing, I don't think 6.6.1 says anything about "link up" being > > the end of a delay. So if we want to do the delay required by 6.6.1, > > "wait_for_link()" doesn't seem like quite the right name. > > > > For another, all the *_wait_for_link() functions can return success > > after 0ms, 90ms, 180ms, etc. They're unlikely to return after 0ms, > > but 90ms is quite possible. If we avoided the 0ms return and > > LINK_WAIT_USLEEP_MIN were 100ms instead of 90ms, that should be enough > > for slow links, where we need 100ms following "exit from reset." > > > > But it's still not enough for fast links where we need 100ms "after > > link training completes" because we don't know when training > > completed. If training completed 89ms into *_wait_for_link(), we only > > delay 1ms after that. > > That's the point, we will add a extra 100ms after PERST# de-assert > in the patch-v3 according to Base Spec r6.0 - 6.6.1: > msleep(100); > gpiod_set_value_cansleep(pcie->reset_gpio, 0); > > + /* As the requirement in PCIe base spec r6.0, system must wait a > + * minimum of 100 ms following exit from a Conventional Reset > + * before sending a Configuration Request to the device.*/ > + msleep(100); > + > if (starfive_pcie_host_wait_for_link(pcie)) > return -EIO; For fast links (links that support > 5.0 GT/s), the 100ms starts *after* link training completes. The above looks OK if starfive only supports slow links, but then I'm not sure why we would need starfive_pcie_host_wait_for_link(). Bjorn _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv