[RFC PATCH V2 1/4] pci: APM X-Gene PCIe controller driver

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Friday 24 January 2014 13:28:22 Tanmay Inamdar wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Tanmay Inamdar <tinamdar at apm.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 4:39 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 15 January 2014, Tanmay Inamdar wrote:

> >>
> >>> +static void xgene_pcie_poll_linkup(struct xgene_pcie_port *port, u32 *lanes)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     void *csr_base = port->csr_base;
> >>> +     u32 val32;
> >>> +     u64 start_time, time;
> >>> +
> >>> +     /*
> >>> +      * A component enters the LTSSM Detect state within
> >>> +      * 20ms of the end of fundamental core reset.
> >>> +      */
> >>> +     msleep(XGENE_LTSSM_DETECT_WAIT);
> >>> +     port->link_up = 0;
> >>> +     start_time = jiffies;
> >>> +     do {
> >>> +             val32 = readl(csr_base + PCIECORE_CTLANDSTATUS);
> >>> +             if (val32 & LINK_UP_MASK) {
> >>> +                     port->link_up = 1;
> >>> +                     port->link_speed = PIPE_PHY_RATE_RD(val32);
> >>> +                     val32 = readl(csr_base + BRIDGE_STATUS_0);
> >>> +                     *lanes = val32 >> 26;
> >>> +             }
> >>> +             time = jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies - start_time);
> >>> +     } while ((!port->link_up) || (time <= XGENE_LTSSM_L0_WAIT));
> >>> +}
> >>
> >> Maybe another msleep() in the loop? It seems weird to first do an
> >> unconditional sleep but then busy-wait for the result.
> >
> > ok.
> 
> This loop can execute for maximum 4 msec. So putting msleep(1) won't
> get us much.
 
4 msec is still quite a long time for a busy loop that can be spent doing
useful work in another thread.

> >>
> >> Another general note: Your "compatible" strings are rather unspecific.
> >> Do you have a version number for this IP block? I suppose that it's related
> >> to one that has been used in other chips before, or will be used in future
> >> chips, if it's not actually licensed from some other company.
> >
> > I will have to check this.
> >
> 
> We have decided to stick with current compatible string for now.

Can you elaborate on your reasoning? Does this mean X-Gene is a one-off
product and you won't be doing any new chips based on the same hardware
components?

	Arnd