[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240326074429.GC9565@thinkpad>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 13:14:29 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@...ux.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Jingoo Han <jingoohan1@...il.com>,
Gustavo Pimentel <gustavo.pimentel@...opsys.com>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhi@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] PCI: qcom-ep: Disable resources unconditionally
during PERST# assert
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 05:08:22PM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 08:53:40PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > All EP specific resources are enabled during PERST# deassert. As a counter
> > operation, all resources should be disabled during PERST# assert. There is
> > no point in skipping that if the link was not enabled.
> >
> > This will also result in enablement of the resources twice if PERST# got
> > deasserted again. So remove the check from qcom_pcie_perst_assert() and
> > disable all the resources unconditionally.
> >
> > Fixes: f55fee56a631 ("PCI: qcom-ep: Add Qualcomm PCIe Endpoint controller driver")
> > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c | 6 ------
> > 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c
> > index 2fb8c15e7a91..50b1635e3cbb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-ep.c
> > @@ -500,12 +500,6 @@ static int qcom_pcie_perst_deassert(struct dw_pcie *pci)
> > static void qcom_pcie_perst_assert(struct dw_pcie *pci)
> > {
> > struct qcom_pcie_ep *pcie_ep = to_pcie_ep(pci);
> > - struct device *dev = pci->dev;
> > -
> > - if (pcie_ep->link_status == QCOM_PCIE_EP_LINK_DISABLED) {
> > - dev_dbg(dev, "Link is already disabled\n");
> > - return;
> > - }
> >
> > dw_pcie_ep_cleanup(&pci->ep);
> > qcom_pcie_disable_resources(pcie_ep);
>
> Are you really sure that this is safe?
>
> I think I remember seeing some splat in dmesg if some clks, or maybe it
> was regulators, got disabled while already being disabled.
>
> Perhaps you could test it by simply calling:
> qcom_pcie_disable_resources();
> twice here, and see if you see and splat in dmesg.
>
Calling the disable_resources() function twice will definitely result in the
splat. But here PERST# is level triggered, so I don't see how the EP can see
assert twice.
Am I missing something?
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
Powered by blists - more mailing lists