Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-109094-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Message-ID: <83dfe28d-505b-4009-044c-684827a1656d@quicinc.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:57:20 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.13.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI: dwc: Enable runtime pm of the host bridge
Content-Language: en-US
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas
	<helgaas@kernel.org>
CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
        Jingoo Han
	<jingoohan1@gmail.com>,
        Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=c5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        Rob Herring
	<robh@kernel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <quic_vbadigan@quicinc.com>, <quic_ramkri@quicinc.com>,
        <quic_nitegupt@quicinc.com>, <quic_skananth@quicinc.com>,
        <quic_parass@quicinc.com>
References: <e83ed3e5-0c31-cfae-6f75-211709e79aa5@quicinc.com>
 <20240308171248.GA685266@bhelgaas> <20240319111148.GF52500@thinkpad>
From: Krishna Chaitanya Chundru <quic_krichai@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240319111148.GF52500@thinkpad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 3/19/2024 4:41 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 11:12:48AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 08, 2024 at 08:38:52AM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>> On 3/8/2024 3:25 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>> [+to Rafael, sorry, another runtime PM question, beginning of thread:
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240305-runtime_pm_enable-v2-1-a849b74091d1@quicinc.com]
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 07:28:54AM +0530, Krishna Chaitanya Chundru wrote:
>>>>> On 3/6/2024 1:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 03:19:01PM +0530, Krishna chaitanya chundru wrote:
>>>>>>> The Controller driver is the parent device of the PCIe host bridge,
>>>>>>> PCI-PCI bridge and PCIe endpoint as shown below.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 	PCIe controller(Top level parent & parent of host bridge)
>>>>>>> 			|
>>>>>>> 			v
>>>>>>> 	PCIe Host bridge(Parent of PCI-PCI bridge)
>>>>>>> 			|
>>>>>>> 			v
>>>>>>> 	PCI-PCI bridge(Parent of endpoint driver)
>>>>>>> 			|
>>>>>>> 			v
>>>>>>> 		PCIe endpoint driver
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since runtime PM is disabled for host bridge, the state of the child
>>>>>>> devices under the host bridge is not taken into account by PM framework
>>>>>>> for the top level parent, PCIe controller. So PM framework, allows
>>>>>>> the controller driver to enter runtime PM irrespective of the state
>>>>>>> of the devices under the host bridge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IIUC this says that we runtime suspend the controller even though
>>>>>> runtime PM is disabled for the host bridge?  I have a hard time
>>>>>> parsing this; can you cite a function that does this or some relevant
>>>>>> documentation about how this part of runtime PM works?
>>>>>>
>>>>> Generally controller should go to runtime suspend when endpoint client
>>>>> drivers and pci-pci host bridge drivers goes to runtime suspend as the
>>>>> controller driver is the parent, but we are observing controller driver
>>>>> goes to runtime suspend even when client drivers and PCI-PCI bridge are
>>>>> in active state.
>>>>
>>>> It surprises me that a device could be suspended while children are
>>>> active.  A PCI-PCI bridge must be in D0 for any devices below it to be
>>>> active.  The controller is a platform device, not a PCI device, but I
>>>> am similarly surprised that we would suspend it when children are
>>>> active, which makes me think we didn't set the hierarchy up correctly.
>>>>
>>>> It doesn't seem like we should need to enable runtime PM for a parent
>>>> to keep it from being suspended when children are active.
>>>
>>> Here we are not enabling runtime PM of the controller device, we are
>>> enabling runtime PM for the bridge device which is maintained by the
>>> PCIe framework. The bridge device is the parent of the PCI-PCI
>>> bridge and child of the controller device. As the bridge device's
>>> runtime PM is not enabled the PM framework is ignoring the child's
>>> runtime status.
>>
>> OK, it's the host bridge, not the controller.
>>
>> I'm still surprised that the PM framework will runtime suspend a
>> device when child devices are active.
>>
> 
> There is a catch here. Even though the child devices are funtionally active, PM
> framework will only consider their runtime_pm state, which is initially set to
> 'disabled' for all devices. It is upto the device drivers to enable it when
> required.
> 
> Here is the initial runtime PM status of each device post boot:
> 
> Controller device -> disabled initially but enabled by pcie-qcom.c
> Host bridge -> disabled initially
> PCIe bridge -> disabled initially but conditionally enabled by portdrv.c
> PCIe devices -> disabled initially but enabled by respective drivers like WLAN
> 
> Now, when the controller device goes to runtime suspend, PM framework will check
> the runtime PM state of the child device (host bridge) and will find it to be
> disabled. So it will allow the parent (controller device) to go to runtime
> suspend. Only if the child device's state was 'active' it will prevent the
> parent to get suspended.
> 
> But you may wonder if this is ideal? IMO NO. But we cannot blame the PM
> framework here. The responsibility is within the device drivers to handle the PM
> state based on the usecase. Ideally, the host bridge driver should've handled
> runtime PM state during the probe time. Otherwise, PM framework wouldn't know
> when would be the best time to suspend the devices.
> 
>> And further confused about managing the host bridge runtime PM in a
>> controller driver.  Which other callers of pci_alloc_host_bridge() or
>> devm_pci_alloc_host_bridge() will need similar changes?
>>
> 
> This scenario applies to all host bridges. So I think we should enable it inside
> pci_host_probe().
> 
> - Mani
> 
I will these runtime enable inside the pci_host_probe().

- Krishna Chaitanya.