Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp804596yba; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:52:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx/vNfVrjjW/YTZ1c86DORoB5vASuON/50xYaF4gkETPiCYNPQ+Eo99oweF0ZlIrpQD1E4M X-Received: by 2002:a62:70c6:: with SMTP id l189mr34580979pfc.139.1556124720013; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:52:00 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1556124720; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=pdnv8+tUm4vOXt/RiEHNWBNs9eNqY9IO/pams4X5rZFRVfGOR9OQ5Vj1FGoejf5L2K wbrBz26Vr73OPTtxixKKWTN74QnHMd3lVB7rfOosf6qf4hS6hoU2+46buUxmQAY1YilO T3XFeuUTfTgs4oUhutkS3bMCIR3PUHYcHMoEDsOfmyY0JdorjBIUuoi8hbJRbniAvz7t P76J8E4Ys3dYQ78eoMI4z9NZIrOfgr+PlRpRU1J1LbDCDaMfS4Le63ciIVlEywO0ZBHG LaMru0gD4sx2wAR4AXaQdGkasmwj0Qplf8AvX5qwxV26rms4i75GL67EqMDBiJ+c2qsB XdEg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=jE9GA4WBMswZSrVXeBzt+uMzBuxoCxRAKU+E4HML+AI=; b=f9SLDdPVKoa+/57E1L5JYwSGWJdCT3KBbwPpD1SxdZP0waw48yUUM7UJRJAMZ+8iUJ 5m4zOK8nzzpkiILWRpLiwXGopInCKBH+Y6bMOfCbe4H29h3aKECOXTXDZTKZl6Arj1t2 I8I/Z9o3/03IE8v6/lm5zjyQXJMKTsns5CLDSyfR7qCfpXcMNrr8V2WZSuSVPQCXAKzn Z3XGQQFPXyrbZWgZwnFGJZqIKfTXI6Mc5fucYHrsEUp7Bq8X9owFqCSLTTi9fNZZJxxh 7iwy2/nhsjWjiiw9S3BwUkHnbvoygyUI6JA0J8Oko/+Ulyemp/vhc+SqMs5c/VLubb1J MQMg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id b96si16305343plb.426.2019.04.24.09.51.43; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:52:00 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732854AbfDXQuK (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:50:10 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:48974 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732828AbfDXQuJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Apr 2019 12:50:09 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2289D374; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com (e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.255]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B15243F557; Wed, 24 Apr 2019 09:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 17:50:02 +0100 From: Lorenzo Pieralisi To: Remi Pommarel Cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Miquel Raynal Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: aardvark: Wait for endpoint to be ready before training link Message-ID: <20190424165002.GA26089@e121166-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190313213752.1246-1-repk@triplefau.lt> <20190423163215.GB26523@red-moon> <20190423222917.GN2754@voidbox.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190423222917.GN2754@voidbox.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:29:18AM +0200, Remi Pommarel wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 05:32:15PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 10:37:52PM +0100, Remi Pommarel wrote: > > > When configuring pcie reset pin from gpio (e.g. initially set by > > > u-boot) to pcie function this pin goes low for a brief moment > > > asserting the PERST# signal. Thus connected device enters fundamental > > > reset process and link configuration can only begin after a minimal > > > 100ms delay (see [1]). > > > > > > This makes sure that link is configured after at least 100ms from > > > beginning of probe() callback (shortly after the reset pin function > > > configuration switch through pinctrl subsytem). I am a bit lost, what's the connection between the probe() callback and the reset pin function configuration ? Please elaborate. > > > > > > [1] "PCI Express Base Specification", REV. 2.1 > > > PCI Express, March 4 2009, 6.6.1 Conventional Reset > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Remi Pommarel > > > --- > > > drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- > > > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > > > index a30ae7cf8e7e..70a1023d0ef1 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > > > @@ -177,6 +177,9 @@ > > > > > > #define PIO_TIMEOUT_MS 1 > > > > > > +/* Endpoint can take up to 100ms to be ready after a reset */ > > > +#define ENDPOINT_RST_MS 100 > > > + > > > #define LINK_WAIT_MAX_RETRIES 10 > > > #define LINK_WAIT_USLEEP_MIN 90000 > > > #define LINK_WAIT_USLEEP_MAX 100000 > > > @@ -242,8 +245,10 @@ static int advk_pcie_wait_for_link(struct advk_pcie *pcie) > > > return -ETIMEDOUT; > > > } > > > > > > -static void advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie) > > > +static void > > > +advk_pcie_setup_hw(struct advk_pcie *pcie, unsigned long ep_rdy_time) > > > > Nit: I prefer the prototype to be in one line, I wrap it for you. > > > > I am wondering why you need to pass in ep_rdy_time parameter when you > > can easily compute it in the function itself. > > > > The only reason for that is because the sooner I get the jiffies the > lower the delay has to be. I was trying to reduce the impact of this > delay to a minimum, but maybe the improvement is not worth it. That should just be (roughly) some microseconds unless there is something I am missing. Try to measure it :) More importantly, I would ask you to elaborate a bit more about the logic behind this patch, see above because I need to understand the logic behind pinctrl reset and the probe() hook execution ordering. Thanks, Lorenzo