From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: Replace short msleep() calls with more precise delay functions
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2025 00:05:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <155f9f4f-45e4-45ea-85c2-de67115bd12c@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250822164638.GA687302@bhelgaas>
On 2025/8/23 00:46, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 11:59:01PM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
>> This series replaces short msleep() calls (less than 20ms) with more
>> precise delay functions (fsleep() and usleep_range()) throughout the
>> PCI subsystem.
>>
>> The msleep() function with small values can sleep longer than intended
>> due to timer granularity, which can cause unnecessary delays in PCI
>> operations such as link status checking, reset handling, and hotplug
>> operations.
>>
>> These changes:
>> - Use fsleep() for delays that require precise timing (1-2ms).
>> - Use usleep_range() for delays that can benefit from a small range.
>> - Add #defines for all delay values with references to PCIe specifications.
>> - Update comments to reference the latest PCIe r7.0 specification.
>>
>> This improves the responsiveness of PCI operations while maintaining
>> compliance with PCIe specifications.
>
Dear Bjron,
Thank you very much for your reply.
> I would split this a little differently:
>
> - Add #defines for values from PCIe base spec. Make the #define
> value match the spec value. If there's adjustment, e.g.,
Ok. For patch 0001, I will modify it again.
> doubling, do it at the sleep site. Adjustment like this seems a
> little paranoid since the spec should already have some margin
> built into it.
Can I understand that it's enough to just use fsleep(1000) here?
patch 0001 I intend to modify it as follows:
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
index b0f4d98036cd..fb4aff520f64 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
@@ -4963,11 +4963,8 @@ void pci_reset_secondary_bus(struct pci_dev *dev)
ctrl |= PCI_BRIDGE_CTL_BUS_RESET;
pci_write_config_word(dev, PCI_BRIDGE_CONTROL, ctrl);
- /*
- * PCI spec v3.0 7.6.4.2 requires minimum Trst of 1ms. Double
- * this to 2ms to ensure that we meet the minimum requirement.
- */
- msleep(2);
+ /* Wait for the reset to take effect */
+ fsleep(PCI_T_RST_SEC_BUS_DELAY_US);
ctrl &= ~PCI_BRIDGE_CTL_BUS_RESET;
pci_write_config_word(dev, PCI_BRIDGE_CONTROL, ctrl);
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.h b/drivers/pci/pci.h
index 34f65d69662e..9d38ef26c6a9 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pci.h
+++ b/drivers/pci/pci.h
@@ -60,6 +60,9 @@ struct pcie_tlp_log;
#define PCIE_LINK_WAIT_MAX_RETRIES 10
#define PCIE_LINK_WAIT_SLEEP_MS 90
+/* PCIe r7.0, sec 7.5.1.3.13, requires minimum Trst of 1ms */
+#define PCI_T_RST_SEC_BUS_DELAY_US 1000
+
/* Message Routing (r[2:0]); PCIe r6.0, sec 2.2.8 */
#define PCIE_MSG_TYPE_R_RC 0
#define PCIE_MSG_TYPE_R_ADDR 1
>
> - Change to fsleep() (or usleep_range()) in separate patch. There
> might be discussion about these changes, but the #defines are
> desirable regardless.
>
> I'm personally dubious about the places you used usleep_range().
> These are low-frequency paths (rcar PHY ready, brcmstb link up,
> hotplug command completion, DPC recover) that don't seem critical. I
> think they're all using made-up delays that don't come from any spec
> or hardware requirement anyway. I think it's hard to make an argument
> for precision here.
My initial understanding was the same. There was no need for such
precision here. Then msleep will be retained, but only modified to #defines?
If you think it's unnecessary, I will discard the remaining patches.
Best regards,
Hans
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-08-24 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-22 15:59 Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] PCI: Replace msleep(2) with fsleep() for precise delay Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: Replace msleep(1) with fsleep() for precise link status checking Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] PCI: rcar-host: Replace msleep(1) with fsleep() for precise speed change monitoring Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] PCI: brcmstb: Replace msleep(5) with usleep_range() for precise link up checking Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] PCI: rcar: Replace msleep(5) with usleep_range() for precise PHY ready checking Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] PCI: pciehp: Replace msleep(10) with usleep_range() for precise delays Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 15:59 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] PCI/DPC: Replace msleep(10) with usleep_range() for precise RP busy checking Hans Zhang
2025-08-22 16:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] PCI: Replace short msleep() calls with more precise delay functions Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-24 16:05 ` Hans Zhang [this message]
2025-08-25 20:30 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-08-26 17:07 ` Hans Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=155f9f4f-45e4-45ea-85c2-de67115bd12c@163.com \
--to=18255117159@163.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®