Re: [PATCH V2 4/5] PCI: rcar: Support runtime PM, link state L1 handling

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 06/13/2018 07:25 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 04:52:52PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 08:53:08AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 01:54:51AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> On 06/11/2018 03:59 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 03:57:10PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/17/2017 06:49 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 10:58:42PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>>> From: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most PCIe host controllers support L0s and L1 power states via ASPM.
>>>>>>>> The R-Car hardware only supports L0s, so when the system suspends and
>>>>>>>> resumes we have to manually handle L1.
>>>>>>>> When the system suspends, cards can put themselves into L1 and send a
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I assumed L1 entry has to be negotiated depending upon the PCIe
>>>>>>> hierarchy capabilities, I would appreciate if you can explain to
>>>>>>> me what's the root cause of the issue please.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You should probably ignore the suspend/resume part altogether. The issue
>>>>>> here is that the cards can enter L1 state, while the controller won't do
>>>>>> that automatically, it can only detect that the link went into L1 state.
>>>>>> If that happens,the driver must manually put the controller to L1 state.
>>>>>> The controller can transition out of L1 state automatically though.
>>>>>
>>>>> From earlier discussion I thought the R-Car root port did not
>>>>> advertise L1 support.
>>>>
>>>> Which discussion ? This one or somewhere else ?
>>>
>>> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/HK2PR0601MB1393D917D343E6363484CA68F5CB0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> Re-reading that, I think I see my misunderstanding.  I was only
>>> considering L1 in the ASPM context.  I didn't realize the L1
>>> implications of devices being in states other than D0.
>>>
>>> Obviously L1 support for ASPM is optional and advertised via Link
>>> Capabilities.  But per PCIe r4.0, sec 5.2, L1 support is required for
>>> PCI-PM compatible power management, and is entered "whenever all
>>> Functions ... are programmed to a D-state other than D0."
>>>
>>> So I guess this means *every* device is supposed to support L1 when it
>>> is in a non-D0 power state.  I think *this* is the case you're
>>> solving.
>>>
>>> A little more of this detail, e.g., that this issue has nothing to do
>>> with ASPM, it's probably an R-Car erratum that the RC can't transition
>>> from L1 to L0, etc., in the changelog would really help clear things
>>> up for me.
>>
>> I think that the issue is related to the L0->L1 transition upon system
>> suspend (ie the kernel must force the controller into L1 when all
>> devices are in a sleep state) and for this specific reason I still think
>> that checking for a PM_Enter_L1 DLLP reception and doing the L0->L1
>> transition within a config access is wrong and prone to error (what's
>> the rationale behind that ?), this ought to be done using PM methods in
>> the host controller driver.
> 
> But doesn't the problem happen whenever the link goes to L1, for any
> reason?  E.g., runtime power management might put an endpoint in D3
> even if we're not doing a whole system suspend.  A user could even
> force the endpoint to D3 by writing to PCI_PM_CTRL with "setpci".  If
> that's the case, I don't think the host controller PM methods will be
> enough to work around the issue.

I think so, it's the link that goes into L1 state and this can happen
without any action from the controller side.

> The comment in the patch ("If we are not in L1 link state and we have
> received PM_ENTER_L1 DLLP, transition to L1 link state") suggests that
> the R-Car host doesn't handle step 10 in PCIe r4.0, sec 5.3.2.1
> correctly, i.e., it doesn't complete the transition of the link to L1.
> 
> Putting this workaround in the config accessor makes sense to me
> because in this situation the endpoint thinks it's in L1 and it won't
> receive TLPs for config accesses.  Apparently forcing the RP to L1
> completes the L1 entry, and the RP correctly handles the "Exit from L1
> State" (sec 5.3.2.2) that's required when the RP needs to send a TLP
> to the endpoint.
> 
> I think there's still a potential issue if the endpoint goes to a
> non-D0 state, the link is stuck in this transitional state (endpoint
> thinks it's L1, RP thinks it's L0), and the *endpoint* wants to exit
> L1, e.g., so it can send a PME message for a wakeup.  I don't know
> what happens then.

Is there some hardware which I can use to simulate this situation ?

> If there were a real erratum writeup for this, it would probably
> discuss this situation.

I went through the latest errata sheet and don't see anything. The
datasheet only mentions that L0/L0s/L1 is supported and L2 is not supported.

Maybe Phil can comment on this too ?

[...]
-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SOC]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux