[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191001125320.GN2714@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2019 15:53:20 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@...el.com>,
Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@...il.com>,
Rajmohan Mani <rajmohan.mani@...el.com>,
Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@...look.com.au>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Mario.Limonciello@...l.com,
Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@...onical.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/22] thunderbolt: Add support for lane bonding
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 02:38:08PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 02:38:14PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > Lane bonding allows aggregating the two 10/20 Gb/s (depending on the
> > generation) lanes into a single 20/40 Gb/s bonded link. This allows
> > sharing the full bandwidth more efficiently. In order to establish lane
> > bonding we need to check that the lane bonding is possible through LC
> > and that both end of the link actually supports 2x widths. This also
> > means that all the paths should be established through the primary port
> > so update tb_path_alloc() to handle this as well.
> >
> > Lane bonding is supported starting from Falcon Ridge (2nd generation)
> > controllers.
>
> Are we only going to be allowed to "bond" two links together? Or will
> we be doing more than 2 in the future? If more, then we might want to
> think of a different way to specify these...
AFAICT only two lanes are available in USB4. This goes over USB type-C
using the two lanes there.
Of course I don't know if in future there will be USB4 1.1 or something
that adds more lanes so if you think there is a better way to specify
these, I'm happy to implement that instead :)
> Anyway, one tiny nit below:
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> > .../ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-thunderbolt | 17 ++
> > drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c | 18 +-
> > drivers/thunderbolt/lc.c | 28 ++
> > drivers/thunderbolt/path.c | 30 +-
> > drivers/thunderbolt/switch.c | 274 ++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c | 21 ++
> > drivers/thunderbolt/tb.h | 10 +
> > drivers/thunderbolt/tb_msgs.h | 2 +
> > drivers/thunderbolt/tb_regs.h | 20 ++
> > drivers/thunderbolt/tunnel.c | 19 +-
> > 10 files changed, 429 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-thunderbolt b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-thunderbolt
> > index b21fba14689b..2c9166f6fa97 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-thunderbolt
> > +++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-thunderbolt
> > @@ -104,6 +104,23 @@ Contact: thunderbolt-software@...ts.01.org
> > Description: This attribute contains name of this device extracted from
> > the device DROM.
> >
> > +What: /sys/bus/thunderbolt/devices/.../link_speed
> > +Date: Apr 2020
> > +KernelVersion: 5.6
> > +Contact: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > +Description: This attribute reports the current upstream link speed
> > + in Gb/s per lane. If there are two lanes they both are
> > + running at the same speed. Use link_width to determine
> > + whether the two lanes are bonded or not.
> > +
> > +What: /sys/bus/thunderbolt/devices/.../link_width
> > +Date: Apr 2020
> > +KernelVersion: 5.6
> > +Contact: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > +Description: This attribute reports the current upstream link width.
> > + It is 1 for single lane link (or two single lane links)
> > + and 2 for bonded dual lane link.
> > +
> > What: /sys/bus/thunderbolt/devices/.../vendor
> > Date: Sep 2017
> > KernelVersion: 4.13
> > diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > index 6550f68f92ce..9c9c6ea2b790 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/icm.c
> > @@ -567,7 +567,8 @@ static struct tb_switch *add_switch(struct tb_switch *parent_sw, u64 route,
> > size_t ep_name_size, u8 connection_id,
> > u8 connection_key, u8 link, u8 depth,
> > enum tb_security_level security_level,
> > - bool authorized, bool boot)
> > + bool authorized, bool boot, bool dual_lane,
> > + bool speed_gen3)
>
> That's just a crazy amount of function parameters, with no way of
> remembering what is what, especially when you add 2 more booleans at the
> end.
>
> It's your code, but ugh, that's going to be hard to maintain over time
> :(
Good point. I'll see if I can simplify it in the next version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists