linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@gmail.com>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>,
	bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
	james.quinlan@broadcom.com,
	Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenz@kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
	<linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM2711/BCM2835 ARM ARCHITECTURE" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] PCI: brcmstb: add shutdown call to driver
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 14:01:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4528fb0-324d-4bd5-5004-7ead22bc5622@broadcom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603205841.GA2139914@bjorn-Precision-5520>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3477 bytes --]

On 6/3/21 1:58 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 10:30:37AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 6/3/21 10:23 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 10:03:47AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>> On 5/25/21 2:18 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 01:51:39PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
>>>>>> The shutdown() call is similar to the remove() call except the former does
>>>>>> not need to invoke pci_{stop,remove}_root_bus(), and besides, errors occur
>>>>>> if it does.
>>>>>
>>>>> This doesn't explain why shutdown() is necessary.  "errors occur"
>>>>> might be a hint, except that AFAICT, many similar drivers do invoke
>>>>> pci_stop_root_bus() and pci_remove_root_bus() (several of them while
>>>>> holding pci_lock_rescan_remove()), without implementing .shutdown().
>>>>
>>>> We have to implement .shutdown() in order to meet a certain power budget
>>>> while the chip is being put into S5 (soft off) state and still support
>>>> Wake-on-WLAN, for our latest chips this translates into roughly 200mW of
>>>> power savings at the wall. We could probably add a word or two in a v2
>>>> that indicates this is done for power savings.
>>>
>>> "Saving power" is a great reason to do this.  But we still need to
>>> connect this to the driver model and the system-level behavior
>>> somehow.
>>>
>>> The pci_driver comment says @shutdown is to "stop idling DMA
>>> operations" and it hooks into reboot_notifier_list in kernel/sys.c.
>>> That's incorrect or at least incomplete because reboot_notifier_list
>>> isn't mentioned at all in kernel/sys.c, and I don't see the connection
>>> between @shutdown and reboot_notifier_list.
>>>
>>> AFAICT, @shutdown is currently used in this path:
>>>
>>>   kernel_restart_prepare or kernel_shutdown_prepare
>>>     device_shutdown
>>>       dev->bus->shutdown
>>>         pci_device_shutdown                     # pci_bus_type.shutdown
>>>           drv->shutdown
>>>
>>> so we're going to either reboot or halt/power-off the entire system,
>>> and we're not going to use this device again until we're in a
>>> brand-new kernel and we re-enumerate the device and re-register the
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> I'm not quite sure how either of those fits into the power-saving
>>> reason.  I guess going to S5 is probably via the kernel_power_off()
>>> path and that by itself doesn't turn off as much power to the PCIe
>>> controller as it could?  And this new .shutdown() method will get
>>> called in that path and will turn off more power, but will still leave
>>> enough for wake-on-LAN to work?  And when we *do* wake from S5,
>>> obviously that means a complete boot with a new kernel.
>>
>> Correct, the S5 shutdown is via kernel_power_off() and will turn off all
>> that we can in the PCIe root complex and its PHY, drop the PCIe link to
>> the end-point which signals that the end-point can enter its own suspend
>> logic, too. And yes, when we do wake-up from S5 it means booting a
>> completely new kernel. S5 is typically implemented in our chips by
>> keeping just a little bit of logic active to service wake-up events
>> (infrared remotes, GPIOs, RTC, etc.).
> 
> Which part of that does this patch change?  Is it that the new
> .shutdown() turns off more power than machine_power_off() does by
> itself?

Yes, with pcie-brcmstb.c providing a .shutdow() callback we have a
chance to turn off our PCIe PHY and the RC's digital clock which would
not be able to do otherwise.
-- 
Florian

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 4221 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-03 21:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-27 17:51 [PATCH v1 0/4] PCI: brcmstb: Add panic handler and shutdown func Jim Quinlan
2021-04-27 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] PCI: brcmstb: Check return value of clk_prepare_enable() Jim Quinlan
2021-04-27 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 2/4] PCI: brcmstb: Give 7216 SOCs their own config type Jim Quinlan
2021-04-27 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 3/4] PCI: brcmstb: Add panic/die handler to RC driver Jim Quinlan
2021-05-25 20:40   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-05-25 21:05     ` Jim Quinlan
2021-05-25 21:17       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-04-27 17:51 ` [PATCH v1 4/4] PCI: brcmstb: add shutdown call to driver Jim Quinlan
2021-04-27 19:35   ` Florian Fainelli
2021-05-25 21:18   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-05-25 21:40     ` Jim Quinlan
2021-05-26 16:11     ` Rob Herring
2021-05-26 17:03     ` Florian Fainelli
2021-06-03 17:23       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-03 17:30         ` Florian Fainelli
2021-06-03 20:58           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-06-03 21:01             ` Florian Fainelli [this message]
2021-05-25 18:01 ` [PATCH v1 0/4] PCI: brcmstb: Add panic handler and shutdown func Florian Fainelli
2021-06-03 16:32 ` Lorenzo Pieralisi
2021-06-03 17:31   ` Jim Quinlan
2021-06-04  9:22     ` Lorenzo Pieralisi

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=e4528fb0-324d-4bd5-5004-7ead22bc5622@broadcom.com \
    --to=florian.fainelli@broadcom.com \
    --cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=james.quinlan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=jim2101024@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=nsaenz@kernel.org \
    --cc=nsaenzjulienne@suse.de \
    --cc=robh@kernel.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).