Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:5bc5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id os5csp1198347pxb; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 00:04:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1o5KYqwVRW3+3GJTK1PboaFu/b+ZGdLw0MslvamLCIhtQmYUZnrpL14erCIrYCu04EYBP X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7302:: with SMTP id di2mr24069129ejc.409.1633935882513; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 00:04:42 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1633935882; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kF5/L3aD69lIW0c/XkXD5RvDjSpSKDT/AKVVYcehwKvxsEBL1hN2nnXLTDuAmJZ9ZL vKVIRIfkjc6u3WezY6pQdtpV0b1KXOC+k5MsB0xDawyNHwuEVrFUSgidan0SVZhMkG+H 38ZTVD7d0JpAZGNXpbqxtQn/Ujg5zBVF7YisBxtAx6EVec+jwx88WULCu5+lLagBZI1n IF8DkOXnL+n7ML/L1r3eII1lwLOXxKWOPkGfTW2wxBbFjgzndUYsF0q2GUA3AM5jY8hp G6gMVBVPJ3raGqlh82PVcUbVp1jNUz+jAOJLoqbDdcJ9K2YE/2GHVH+GM1z9GkcNt8xv bwlw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=PlcT9rvD1dvjZaB3dx+iix2UkPTYFxnhUV8lwNvzsZY=; b=O7f/iphUU0vgb13lEKijQPy0mUpQOJ219Li5v2g2hFk0vOSivfi0fm6vWO2rbsveg/ JpW0I8LR3wqbLtkCDPFI694Fyv4HVrhW98bbl59iW8NwBvhDnIbCZ0YfhHla86NI0jHj xEuZ2JlCqy1Fh7ZoZE87cSJS/jQ0KaGMl5CKE6n1iLKGb/n8r5dhqDHHH3v0k75Ts9wU w5/IcqnADCcGyATRYjA5RecaqDRmU52nXlv7f+vn8bJrkp+lVs/jynIKqNoYMmUgyw4t 2Dguobz11oKzGTH6NUctgYNBVU89uoMaCfcW5ZmlYAMjsFWAFD8X3BMMwWsWq3UzmXSA xGBg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=VEwoq654; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id hs6si21391889ejc.12.2021.10.11.00.04.17; Mon, 11 Oct 2021 00:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=VEwoq654; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=QUARANTINE dis=NONE) header.from=gmail.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233234AbhJKGD7 (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 11 Oct 2021 02:03:59 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40020 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233821AbhJKGD6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Oct 2021 02:03:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32e.google.com (mail-ot1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C0EDC061570; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 23:01:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id k2-20020a056830168200b0054e523d242aso10844473otr.6; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 23:01:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=PlcT9rvD1dvjZaB3dx+iix2UkPTYFxnhUV8lwNvzsZY=; b=VEwoq654tY+UN7iIKQHsNkwzWNz9YM+984R63O0yroSj7Gub3qJ3qZ0wTAxvvdu0yZ 4srcFSqHNNntMR9hRO4/fmgD9hwvBGDIwH/T7CsU37+wju8Gcxc/HOTVJmoHal1uKRTl XlhfCmpWboLiHyAkPqFjYT2looLrY7MWBc5CxVtEUTRiz7nJ0oT4MSTqILOMbxhMYyCM MhmBu/xCGMSo3N/9hmeCoUKG7YQP2TOTmcRZfxq/eyuAFH+DBLUabhHTwZd1Q/IFiT49 bgrUOnI4IX20/vVBEhyzK9+462rndTKye7Oro+yEwxz6/dd580eIPR9z0UGfzF/Le4za 3UZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PlcT9rvD1dvjZaB3dx+iix2UkPTYFxnhUV8lwNvzsZY=; b=z+AML6PIAxByV8bDWS/aBS4pKZSoiqXus7ffCzW0xg2uQATW8fxQKHVbOIucm+Cdhm dVkAge04IqPC6j0TXtUA1oAnHB1/v79XuYYtllrd2ravJYX+pFHUGdH335MA74EzR6FE 8v0VAMVEg76HVoWcGW0KMRnafCt6Ke1qUvIkVJB+KJc4YV2koo6QbcOvGpCTQR2x85F0 reARsP1ajRsm4jqQ4YSnzNugpJqx7WHeUue7NsHco+qJ1bGdsTv9uV3ENf7jWjtgEELC 8iLIS3kPHFMqtY95UBhRto4Kbi0ZHEKdaQfQ5P7JNzL92V/K0LryCziKYIv8OWkIFV6L OJMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531HrK4TXViZCS0K8oXSlmHEa0lYvzgojoGn8L6A9O8Juy1W61Yj 89Y7wmlFAd08koGCCVLYQSkRsLy+kmebONckUkwSJec4 X-Received: by 2002:a9d:4616:: with SMTP id y22mr3017307ote.165.1633932118551; Sun, 10 Oct 2021 23:01:58 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210929004315.22558-2-refactormyself@gmail.com> <20210930224000.GA908006@bhelgaas> In-Reply-To: <20210930224000.GA908006@bhelgaas> From: Saheed Bolarinwa Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 08:01:46 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] PCI/ASPM: Remove struct pcie_link_state.parent To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Oct 1, 2021 at 12:40 AM Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:43:12AM +0200, Saheed O. Bolarinwa wrote: > > From: "Bolarinwa O. Saheed" > > > > Information cached in struct pcie_link_state.parent is accessible > > via struct pci_dev. > > > > This patch: > > - removes *parent* from the *struct pcie_link_state* > > - creates pci_get_parent() which returns the parent of a pci_dev > > - replaces references to pcie_link_state.parent with a call to > > pci_get_parent() > > - removes BUG_ON(root->parent), instead uses the parent's root > > > > Signed-off-by: Bolarinwa O. Saheed > > --- > > drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c > > index 013a47f587ce..414c04ffe962 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c > > +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c > > @@ -50,7 +50,6 @@ struct pcie_link_state { > > struct pci_dev *pdev; /* Upstream component of the Link */ > > struct pci_dev *downstream; /* Downstream component, function 0 */ > > struct pcie_link_state *root; /* pointer to the root port link */ > > - struct pcie_link_state *parent; /* pointer to the parent Link state */ > > struct list_head sibling; /* node in link_list */ > > > > /* ASPM state */ > > @@ -139,6 +138,14 @@ static int policy_to_clkpm_state(struct pcie_link_state *link) > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static struct pci_dev *pci_get_parent(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > +{ > > + if (!pdev || !pdev->bus->parent || !pdev->bus->parent->self) > > + return NULL; > > + > > + return pdev->bus->parent->self; > > +} > > I LOVE the idea of getting rid of the pcie_link_state.parent pointer. > I think it's dumb to maintain a shadow hierarchy when we already HAVE > a hierarchy in struct pci_dev. > > I'm not in love with the pci_get_parent() name because a pci_dev > doesn't really have a "parent." The closest thing to a parent would > be the bridge upstream from the device, and that's not what this > returns. > > This actually has to start from a Downstream Port (not an Endpoint) > because the struct pcie_link_state is always associated with the > upstream end of the link. > > And it actually returns the bridge that is *two* levels up, because > that's the upstream end of the next link, so it's more like the > "grandparent" of pdev, not the "parent." > > Example from my laptop: > > 0a:04.0 Downstream Port (switch A) to [bus 0c-3d] > 0c:00.0 Upstream Port (switch B) to [bus 0d-3d] > 0d:01.0 Downstream Port (switch B) to [bus 0e] > 0e:00.0 Upstream Port (Endpoint) USB controller > > Here there are two links: > > 0a:04.0 --- 0c:00.0 > 0d:01.0 --- 0e:00.0 > > and the pcie_link_states are associated with 0a:04.0 and 0d:01.0. > > If we start from 0d:01.0, which is the upstream end of the last link: > > "pdev" is a pci_dev of a downstream port, e.g., 0d:01.0. > "pdev->bus" is the pci_bus pdev is on: [bus 0d]. > "pdev->bus->self" is the bridge leading to "bus": 0c:00.0. > "pdev->bus->parent" is the parent pci_bus of [bus 0d]: [bus 0c]. > "pdev->bus->parent->self" is the bridge leading to [bus 0c]: 0a:04.0. > > Sorry for the rambling, just trying to get this all clear in my head. Thanks, it is very helpful for me. > > Almost all the calls of pci_get_parent() look like this: > > parent = pci_get_parent(link->pdev); > link = parent ? parent->link_state : NULL; > > What if you made something like this: > > struct pcie_link_state *pcie_upstream_link(struct pcie_link_state *link) This is better, especially using pci_upstream_bridge() directly. By returning struct pci_dev, I was trying to avoid "struct pcie_link_state", so as to ease the journey towards eliminating it. Also, will it be helpful to handle NULL values within pci_upstream_bridge()? > { > struct pci_dev *bridge; > > bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(link->pdev); > if (!bridge) > return NULL; > > bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(bridge); > return bridge ? bridge->link_state : NULL; > } > > > static void pcie_set_clkpm_nocheck(struct pcie_link_state *link, int enable) > > { > > struct pci_dev *child; > > @@ -379,6 +386,7 @@ static void encode_l12_threshold(u32 threshold_us, u32 *scale, u32 *value) > > static void pcie_aspm_check_latency(struct pci_dev *endpoint) > > { > > u32 latency, l1_switch_latency = 0; > > + struct pci_dev *parent; > > struct aspm_latency *acceptable; > > struct pcie_link_state *link; > > > > @@ -419,7 +427,8 @@ static void pcie_aspm_check_latency(struct pci_dev *endpoint) > > link->aspm_capable &= ~ASPM_STATE_L1; > > l1_switch_latency += 1000; > > > > - link = link->parent; > > + parent = pci_get_parent(link->pdev); > > + link = parent ? parent->link_state : NULL; > > } > > } > > > > @@ -793,9 +802,11 @@ static void pcie_config_aspm_link(struct pcie_link_state *link, u32 state) > > > > static void pcie_config_aspm_path(struct pcie_link_state *link) > > { > > + struct pci_dev *parent; > > Missing a blank line here. > > > while (link) { > > pcie_config_aspm_link(link, policy_to_aspm_state(link)); > > - link = link->parent; > > + parent = pci_get_parent(link->pdev); > > + link = parent ? parent->link_state : NULL; > > } > > } > > > > @@ -864,16 +875,15 @@ static struct pcie_link_state *alloc_pcie_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > !pdev->bus->parent->self) { > > link->root = link; > > } else { > > - struct pcie_link_state *parent; > > + struct pci_dev *parent; > > > > - parent = pdev->bus->parent->self->link_state; > > - if (!parent) { > > + parent = pci_get_parent(pdev); > > + if (!parent->link_state) { > > kfree(link); > > return NULL; > > } > > > > - link->parent = parent; > > - link->root = link->parent->root; > > + link->root = parent->link_state->root; > > } > > > > list_add(&link->sibling, &link_list); > > @@ -962,7 +972,11 @@ void pcie_aspm_init_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > static void pcie_update_aspm_capable(struct pcie_link_state *root) > > { > > struct pcie_link_state *link; > > - BUG_ON(root->parent); > > + struct pci_dev *parent = pci_get_parent(root->pdev); > > + > > + if (parent && parent->link_state) > > + root = parent->link_state->root; > > + > > list_for_each_entry(link, &link_list, sibling) { > > if (link->root != root) > > continue; > > @@ -985,6 +999,7 @@ static void pcie_update_aspm_capable(struct pcie_link_state *root) > > /* @pdev: the endpoint device */ > > void pcie_aspm_exit_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > { > > + struct pci_dev *parent_dev; > > struct pci_dev *parent = pdev->bus->self; > > struct pcie_link_state *link, *root, *parent_link; > > > > @@ -1002,7 +1017,8 @@ void pcie_aspm_exit_link_state(struct pci_dev *pdev) > > > > link = parent->link_state; > > root = link->root; > > - parent_link = link->parent; > > + parent_dev = pci_get_parent(link->pdev); > > + parent_link = parent_dev ? parent_dev->link_state : NULL; > > > > /* All functions are removed, so just disable ASPM for the link */ > > pcie_config_aspm_link(link, 0); > > -- > > 2.20.1 > >