From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Kenji Chen <kenji.chen@intel.com>,
Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>,
Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@nvidia.com>,
David Daney <david.daney@cavium.com>,
Krishna Kishore <kthota@nvidia.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vidya Sagar <vidyas@nvidia.com>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
Patrick Georgi <pgeorgi@chromium.org>,
Rajat Jain <rajatja@google.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>,
Stefan Reinauer <stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org>,
Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] PCI/ASPM: Refine L1 PM Substates support
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 13:40:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171205194050.GD23510@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171202211833.23146.5744.stgit@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com>
On Sat, Dec 02, 2017 at 03:45:38PM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> The PCIe active link power state is L0. ASPM defines two low-power
> states: L0s and L1. The L1 PM Substates feature defines two
> additional low-power states: L1.1 and L2.2.
>
> The L1.2 state may have substantial entry/exit latency. Downstream
> devices can use the Latency Tolerance Reporting (LTR) feature to
> report how much latency they can tolerate. The L1 PM Substates
> capability includes a programmable L1.2 threshold register. If the
> downstream devices can tolerate the latency indicated by the
> threshold, L1.2 may be used.
>
> If LTR is not enabled, the L1.2 threshold is ignored and L1.2 can be
> used whenever it is enabled and CLKREQ# is de-asserted. Linux
> currently never enables LTR, but firmware may have done so.
>
> The current L1 PM substates support in Linux sets the L1.2 threshold
> to a fixed value (163.84us) copied from coreboot [1]. I don't know
> where that value came from, and it is incorrect for some platforms,
> e.g., Tegra [2].
>
> These patches change that so we calculate the L1.2 threshold based on
> values reported by the hardware, and we enable LTR whenever possible.
>
> This is all just my understanding from reading the spec. I'd be glad
> to be corrected if I'm going wrong.
>
> I'm particularly puzzled about the coreboot code in
> pciexp_L1_substate_commit() that sets LTR_L1.2_THRESHOLD:
>
> + pcie_update_cfg(root, root_cap + 0x08, ~0xe3ff0000,
> + (1 << 21) | (1 << 23) | (1 << 30));
>
> This is writing the L1 PM Substates Control 1 register, but the shifts
> don't match up with any of the fields in the register, so this is an
> awfully funny way to write the threshold.
>
> [1] https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot-gerrit/2015-March/021134.html
> [2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1510492674-12786-1-git-send-email-vidyas@nvidia.com
>
> ---
>
> Bjorn Helgaas (2):
> PCI/ASPM: Calculate LTR_L1.2_THRESHOLD from device characteristics
> PCI/ASPM: Enable Latency Tolerance Reporting when supported
>
>
> drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> drivers/pci/probe.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 2 +
> 3 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
I applied these with Vidya's Reviewed-by to pci/aspm for v4.16.
I'd still really like to hear from the coreboot folks about the
rationale for the current coreboot code. You folks are in a much
better position to actually understand the hardware details.
Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-05 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-02 21:45 Bjorn Helgaas
2017-12-02 21:45 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] PCI/ASPM: Calculate LTR_L1.2_THRESHOLD from device characteristics Bjorn Helgaas
2017-12-02 21:45 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] PCI/ASPM: Enable Latency Tolerance Reporting when supported Bjorn Helgaas
2017-12-04 19:08 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] PCI/ASPM: Refine L1 PM Substates support Vidya Sagar
2017-12-05 19:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2017-12-06 1:55 ` Chen, Kenji
2017-12-07 14:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2017-12-07 15:00 ` Chen, Kenji
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=20171205194050.GD23510@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com \
--to=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=david.daney@cavium.com \
--cc=dlaurie@chromium.org \
--cc=kenji.chen@intel.com \
--cc=kthota@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mmaddireddy@nvidia.com \
--cc=pgeorgi@chromium.org \
--cc=rajatja@google.com \
--cc=stefan.reinauer@coreboot.org \
--cc=treding@nvidia.com \
--cc=vidyas@nvidia.com \
--cc=yinghai@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®