On 3/8/19 6:17 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc linux-pm, Rafael for SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS question at the end]
>
> On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 11:49:34PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 3/7/19 9:50 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 02:24:41PM +0100, marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>>> From: Kazufumi Ikeda <kaz-ikeda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> Reestablish the PCIe link very early in the resume process in case it
>>>> went down to prevent PCI accesses from hanging the bus. Such accesses
>>>> can happen early in the PCI resume process, in the resume_noirq, thus
>>>> the link must be reestablished in the resume_noirq callback of the
>>>> driver.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kazufumi Ikeda <kaz-ikeda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gaku Inami <gaku.inami.xw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> ---
>>>> V2: - Use BIT() macro for (1 << n)
>>>> - Since polling in rcar_pcie_wait_for_dl() uses udelay(), do not
>>>> add extra changes to this function anymore
>>>> - Make resume_noirq return early and clean up parenthesis therein
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> index c8febb009454..b8f8fb3bc640 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@
>>>>
>>>> /* Transfer control */
>>>> #define PCIETCTLR 0x02000
>>>> +#define DL_DOWN BIT(3)
>>>> #define CFINIT 1
>>>
>>> I saw discussion after the V1 patch about using BIT() and making
>>> similar constants also use BIT() for consistency. That makes sense to
>>> me, and I think the best way would be:
>>>
>>> 1) in *this* patch, use "#define DL_DOWN 8"
>>> 2) in a followup patch, convert them all to BIT()
>>>
>>> That way each revision of pcie-rcar.c is self-consistent.
>>
>> But the BIT() macros are already cleaned , see commit
>> 0ee40820989b330e24926d82953ffb9e1c7a8425
>>
>> PCI: rcar: Clean up the macros
>
> Hmmm. Maybe I'm missing something, but it looks like 0ee40820989b
> didn't touch CFINIT, DATA_LINK_ACTIVE, or MSIFE. Arguably,
> LINK_SPEED_2_5GTS and LINK_SPEED_5_0GTS could use BIT() also.
>
> I guess I'm just old-school, but in my personal opinion, BIT() is more
> trouble than it's worth. I'd rather see a complete bitmask because I
> can easily match it with the typical pictures in a spec, multi-bit
> fields are easy (you don't have to mix BIT() and GENMASK()), it gives
> a hint about the register width, it's easy to match with a hexdump,
> etc, e.g.,
>
> #define DL_DOWN 0x00000008
> #define CFINIT 0x00000001
>
> But I'm not suggesting that you get rid of BIT() in this driver. I'm
> fine with it as long as it's used consistently.
>
> BTW, while we're looking at it, I think rcar_pci_read_reg() and
> rcar_pci_write_reg() really should use "u32" instead of "unsigned
> long", since they deal with hardware registers that are explicitly
> 32 bits wide.
OK, I can send those as separate patches.
>>>> #define PCIETSTR 0x02004
>>>> #define DATA_LINK_ACTIVE 1
>>>> @@ -1130,6 +1131,7 @@ static int rcar_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> pcie = pci_host_bridge_priv(bridge);
>>>>
>>>> pcie->dev = dev;
>>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pcie);
>>>>
>>>> err = pci_parse_request_of_pci_ranges(dev, &pcie->resources, NULL);
>>>> if (err)
>>>> @@ -1221,10 +1223,28 @@ static int rcar_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> return err;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +static int rcar_pcie_resume_noirq(struct device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct rcar_pcie *pcie = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (rcar_pci_read_reg(pcie, PMSR) &&
>>>> + !(rcar_pci_read_reg(pcie, PCIETCTLR) & DL_DOWN))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Re-establish the PCIe link */
>>>> + rcar_pci_write_reg(pcie, CFINIT, PCIETCTLR);
>>>> + return rcar_pcie_wait_for_dl(pcie);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct dev_pm_ops rcar_pcie_pm_ops = {
>>>> + .resume_noirq = rcar_pcie_resume_noirq,
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> I think there's the beginning of a convention to use #ifdef
>>> CONFIG_PM_SLEEP around the ops themselves [1]. Otherwise I think
>>> we'll get a warning about unused code when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is unset.
>>
>> Only if I used SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS() , but I set the
>> resume_noirq directly.
>
> Fair enough. I guess in this case if CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is unset, you
> set the pointer, which avoids the "unused function" warning, but we
> just never use that function pointer.
>
> My intent is to avoid needless differences when possible, so when I
> review things like this I look at how other drivers do things. It
> looks like all the other controllers use
> SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS() or similar:
>
> git grep -A3 "static.*dev_pm_ops" drivers/pci/controller
>
> In the rcar case you only need the resume_fn, not the suspend_fn, so
> SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS() does a little more than you need and
> you'd have to pass NULL for suspend_fn. I didn't check them all
> (suspend_noirq, freeze_noirq, poweroff_noirq), but at least for
> suspend_noirq, all users check for NULL before calling through the
> .suspend_noirq() function pointer, so I think that should be safe.
>
> This *does* raise the question of whether you should be setting
> .thaw_noirq and .restore_noirq in addition to .resume_noirq, as
> SET_NOIRQ_SYSTEM_SLEEP_PM_OPS() would. I'm not a PM person, but maybe
> Rafael or others will chime in.
OK, let's wait for the feedback ...
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
