Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932402Ab3HAVzn (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:55:43 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47980 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932071Ab3HAVzl (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:55:41 -0400 Message-ID: <51FAD959.4000803@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 17:55:37 -0400 From: Don Dutile User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130108 Thunderbird/10.0.12 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Williamson CC: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, indou.takao@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 8/9] pci: Tune secondary bus reset timing References: <20130801164652.16145.79918.stgit@bling.home> <20130801165557.16145.57324.stgit@bling.home> <51FAD338.5000306@redhat.com> <1375393280.31262.254.camel@ul30vt.home> In-Reply-To: <1375393280.31262.254.camel@ul30vt.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3862 Lines: 91 On 08/01/2013 05:41 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 17:29 -0400, Don Dutile wrote: >> On 08/01/2013 12:55 PM, Alex Williamson wrote: >>> The PCI spec indicates that with stable power, reset needs to be >>> asserted for a minimum of 1ms (Trst). Seems like we should be able >>> to assume power is stable for a runtime secondary bus reset. The >>> current code has always used 100ms with no explanation where that >>> came from. The aer_do_secondary_bus_reset() function uses 2ms, but >>> that seems to be a misinterpretation of the PCIe spec, where hot >>> reset is implemented by TS1 ordered sets containing the hot reset >>> command. After a 2ms delay the state machine enters the detect state, >>> but to generate a link down, only two consecutive TS1 hot reset >>> ordered sets are requred. 1ms should be plenty for that. >>> >>> After reset is de-asserted we must wait for devices to complete >>> initialization. The specs refer to this as "recovery time" (Trhfa). >>> For PCI this is 2^25 clock cycles or 2^26 for PCI-X. For minimum >>> bus speeds, both of those come to 1s. PCIe "softens" this >>> requirement with the Configuration Request Retry Status (CRS) >>> completion status. Theoretically we could use CRS to shorten the >>> wait time. We don't make use of that here, using a fixed 1s delay >>> to allow devices to re-initialize. >> Unfortunately, I don't think CRS is widely supported to make it worth >> the additional checking& use, atm. >> >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson >>> --- >>> drivers/pci/pci.c | 15 +++++++++++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c >>> index 3e71887..a5c6a9b 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c >>> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c >>> @@ -3291,11 +3291,22 @@ void pci_reset_bridge_secondary_bus(struct pci_dev *dev) >>> pci_read_config_word(dev, PCI_BRIDGE_CONTROL,&ctrl); >>> ctrl |= PCI_BRIDGE_CTL_BUS_RESET; >>> pci_write_config_word(dev, PCI_BRIDGE_CONTROL, ctrl); >>> - msleep(100); >>> + /* >>> + * PCI spec v3.0 7.6.4.2 requires minimum Trst of 1ms. >>> + */ >>> + msleep(1); >>> >>> ctrl&= ~PCI_BRIDGE_CTL_BUS_RESET; >>> pci_write_config_word(dev, PCI_BRIDGE_CONTROL, ctrl); >>> - msleep(100); >>> + >>> + /* >>> + * Trhfa for conventional PCI is 2^25 clock cycles. >>> + * Assuming a minimum 33MHz clock this results in a 1s >>> + * delay before we can consider subordinate devices to >>> + * be re-initialized. PCIe has some ways to shorten this, >>> + * but we don't make use of them yet. >>> + */ >>> + ssleep(1); >> Can't bus speed be determined from (config space) status bits, so >> this time can be minimized, esp. on modern, PCIe busses/links ? >> Not too many 33Mhz, legacy PCI busses that this type of >> timing is desired, or will be done to (for device assignment/vfio). :-/ > > Just like CRS, is it worth it? The PCIe spec seems to indicate a 1s > Trhfa regardless of bus speed. Even if it didn't, we'd need to walk > down through all the subordinate buses to find a least common > denominator. It seems sufficiently complicated to save it for a later > optimization. Thanks, > > Alex > ya sure.. I figured you had the spec memorized w/all these reset patches you've worked on! ;-) >>> } >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_reset_bridge_secondary_bus); >>> >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/