Skip to contentSkip to conversation

PCI: rockchip: Improve driver quality

RFC PATCH Superseded Geraldo Nascimento 2 participants 16 messages Jun 13, 2025 – Jun 20, 2025

Subsystems (5)

v5 of 9 Superseded Latest is v9 →

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

v5 cover PCI: rockchip: Improve driver quality

During a 30-day debugging-run fighting quirky PCIe devices on RK3399 some quality improvements began to take form and this is my attempt at upstreaming it. It will ensure maximum chance of retraining to Gen2 5.0GT/s, on all four lanes and plus if anybody is debugging the PHY they'll now get real values from TEST_I[3:0] for every TEST_ADDR[4:0] without risk of locking up kernel like with present broken async strobe TEST_WRITE.

---
V4 -> V5: fix build failure, reflow commit messages and also convert registers for EP operation, all suggested by Ilpo
V3 -> V4: fix setting-up of TLS in Link Control and Status Register 2, also adjust commit titles
V2 -> V3: correctly clean-up with standard PCIe defines as per Bjorn's suggestion
V1 -> V2: use standard PCIe defines as suggested by Bjorn

Geraldo Nascimento (4):
PCI: rockchip: Use standard PCIe defines
PCI: rockchip: Set Target Link Speed before retraining
phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes
phy: rockchip-pcie: Adjust read mask and write

 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-ep.c   |  4 +-
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c | 49 ++++++++++++---------
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h      | 12 +----
 drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c    | 16 ++++---
 4 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
#1 lore raw

RFC PATCH v5 1/4 PCI: rockchip: Use standard PCIe defines

Current code uses custom-defined register offsets and bitfields for standard PCIe registers. Change to using standard PCIe defines. Since we are now using standard PCIe defines, drop unused custom-defined ones, which are now referenced from offset at added Capabilities Register.

---
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-ep.c   |  4 +-
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c | 45 +++++++++++----------
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h      | 12 +-----
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-ep.c +2 -2
index 55416b8311dd..300cd85fa035 100644
@@ -518,9 +518,9 @@ static void rockchip_pcie_ep_retrain_link(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
 {
 	u32 status;
 
-	status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_EP_CONFIG_LCS);
+	status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_EP_CONFIG_BASE + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL);
 	status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RL;
-	rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_EP_CONFIG_LCS);
+	rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_EP_CONFIG_BASE + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL);
 }
 
 static bool rockchip_pcie_ep_link_up(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +23 -22

96 lines not on this page · raw message

drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h +1 -11
index 5864a20323f2..f5cbf3c9d2d9 100644
@@ -155,17 +155,7 @@
 #define PCIE_EP_CONFIG_DID_VID		(PCIE_EP_CONFIG_BASE + 0x00)
 #define PCIE_EP_CONFIG_LCS		(PCIE_EP_CONFIG_BASE + 0xd0)
 #define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_RID_CCR		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0x08)
-#define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCR		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0xc4)
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCR_CSPL_SHIFT		18
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCR_CSPL_LIMIT		0xff
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCR_CPLS_SHIFT		26
-#define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCSR		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0xc8)
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCSR_MPS_MASK		GENMASK(7, 5)
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_DCSR_MPS_256		(0x1 << 5)
-#define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_LINK_CAP		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0xcc)
-#define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_LINK_CAP_L0S		BIT(10)
-#define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_LCS		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0xd0)
-#define PCIE_EP_CONFIG_LCS		(PCIE_EP_CONFIG_BASE + 0xd0)
+#define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0xc0)
 #define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_L1_SUBSTATE_CTRL2 (PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0x90c)
 #define PCIE_RC_CONFIG_THP_CAP		(PCIE_RC_CONFIG_BASE + 0x274)
 #define   PCIE_RC_CONFIG_THP_CAP_NEXT_MASK	GENMASK(31, 20)
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
#2 lore raw

RFC PATCH v5 2/4 PCI: rockchip: Set Target Link Speed before retraining

In reply to Geraldo Nascimento

Current code may fail Gen2 retraining if Target Link Speed is set to 2.5 GT/s in Link Control and Status Register 2. Set it to 5.0 GT/s accordingly.

---
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +4 -0
index 8489d51e01ca..467e3fc377f7 100644
@@ -341,6 +341,10 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_host_init_port(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
 		 * Enable retrain for gen2. This should be configured only after
 		 * gen1 finished.
 		 */
+		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
+		status &= ~PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS;
+		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS_5_0GT;
+		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
 		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
 		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL);
 		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RL;
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
#3 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/4] PCI: rockchip: Set Target Link Speed before retraining

Quoted 14 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code may fail Gen2 retraining if Target Link Speed is set to 2.5 GT/s in Link Control and Status Register 2. Set it to 5.0 GT/s accordingly.

---
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +0 -0
index 8489d51e01ca..467e3fc377f7 100644

drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c static int rockchip_pcie_host_init_port(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip) · line 348

Quoted 8 lines
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +4 -0
@@ -341,6 +341,10 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_host_init_port(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
 		 * Enable retrain for gen2. This should be configured only after
 		 * gen1 finished.
 		 */
+		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
+		status &= ~PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS;
+		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS_5_0GT;
+		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
 		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);

Hi,

I see rockchip_pcie_write() was added twice, in this patch and also in 1/4.

I'll send v6 with correction after I get some reviews.

Thank you,
Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 5 lines
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +0 -0
 		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL);
 		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RL;
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
Tested-by on v5 2/4
#4 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/4] PCI: rockchip: Set Target Link Speed before retraining

In reply to Geraldo Nascimento
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code may fail Gen2 retraining if Target Link Speed is set to 2.5 GT/s in Link Control and Status Register 2. Set it to 5.0 GT/s accordingly.

I have max-link-speed overridden to 2 in my local DTB, and indeed this seems to make my NVMe report a 5.0 GT/s link where previously it was still downgrading to 2.5, so:

Quoted 20 lines
---
  drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c | 4 ++++
  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c +4 -0
index 8489d51e01ca..467e3fc377f7 100644
@@ -341,6 +341,10 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_host_init_port(struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip)
  		 * Enable retrain for gen2. This should be configured only after
  		 * gen1 finished.
  		 */
+		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
+		status &= ~PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS;
+		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2_TLS_5_0GT;
+		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
  		rockchip_pcie_write(rockchip, status, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL2);
  		status = rockchip_pcie_read(rockchip, PCIE_RC_CONFIG_CR + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL);
  		status |= PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RL;
#5 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 2/4] PCI: rockchip: Set Target Link Speed before retraining

Quoted 11 lines · Robin Murphy
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code may fail Gen2 retraining if Target Link Speed is set to 2.5 GT/s in Link Control and Status Register 2. Set it to 5.0 GT/s accordingly.

I have max-link-speed overridden to 2 in my local DTB, and indeed this seems to make my NVMe report a 5.0 GT/s link where previously it was still downgrading to 2.5, so:

Hi Robin,

thanks for the testing, I'll include the tag in v6 once Bjorn gets back to me on the 16-bit adjacent registers problem.

Geraldo Nascimento

#6 lore raw

RFC PATCH v5 3/4 phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

In reply to Geraldo Nascimento

Current code enables only Lane 0 because pwr_cnt will be incremented on first call to the function. Use for-loop to enable all 4 lanes through GRF.

---
 drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c | 12 +++++++-----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +7 -5
index bd44af36c67a..48bcc7d2b33b 100644
@@ -176,11 +176,13 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
 				   PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK,
 				   PHY_CFG_ADDR_SHIFT));
 
-	regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base,
-		     rk_phy->phy_data->pcie_laneoff,
-		     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
-				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
-				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + inst->index));
+	for (int i=0; i < PHY_MAX_LANE_NUM; i++) {
+		regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base,
+			     rk_phy->phy_data->pcie_laneoff,
+			     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
+					   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
+					   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + i));
+	}
 
 	/*
 	 * No documented timeout value for phy operation below,
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
#7 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 3/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code enables only Lane 0 because pwr_cnt will be incremented on first call to the function. Use for-loop to enable all 4 lanes through GRF.

If this was really necessary, then surely it would also need the equivalent changes in rockchip_pcie_phy_power_off() too?

However, I'm not sure it *is* necessary - the NVMe on my RK3399 board happily claims to be using an x4 link, so I stuck a print of inst->index in this function, and sure enough I do see it being called for each instance already:

[    1.737479] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.1: power_on 0
[    1.738810] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.2: power_on 1
[    1.745193] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.3: power_on 2
[    1.745196] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.4: power_on 3

Thanks,
Robin.

Quoted 28 lines
---
  drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c | 12 +++++++-----
  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +7 -5
index bd44af36c67a..48bcc7d2b33b 100644
@@ -176,11 +176,13 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
  				   PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK,
  				   PHY_CFG_ADDR_SHIFT));
 
-	regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base,
-		     rk_phy->phy_data->pcie_laneoff,
-		     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
-				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
-				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + inst->index));
+	for (int i=0; i < PHY_MAX_LANE_NUM; i++) {
+		regmap_write(rk_phy->reg_base,
+			     rk_phy->phy_data->pcie_laneoff,
+			     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
+					   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
+					   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + i));
+	}
 
  	/*
  	 * No documented timeout value for phy operation below,
#8 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 3/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

Quoted 13 lines · Robin Murphy
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code enables only Lane 0 because pwr_cnt will be incremented on first call to the function. Use for-loop to enable all 4 lanes through GRF.

If this was really necessary, then surely it would also need the equivalent changes in rockchip_pcie_phy_power_off() too?

However, I'm not sure it *is* necessary - the NVMe on my RK3399 board happily claims to be using an x4 link, so I stuck a print of inst->index in this function, and sure enough I do see it being called for each instance already:

Quoted 5 lines
[    1.737479] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.1: power_on 0
[    1.738810] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.2: power_on 1
[    1.745193] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.3: power_on 2
[    1.745196] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.4: power_on 3

Hi Robin, and thanks for caring, it's excellent to rely on your extensive expertise on ARM in general and RK3399 specifically!

However, on my board I'm positive it does not work without proposed patch and I get stuck with x1 link without it.

There are currently very similar patches applied downstream to Armbian and OpenWRT so at least I'm confident that is not only my board which is quirky and other people experienced the same problem.

Thanks,
Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 2 lines

Thanks,
Robin.

#9 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 3/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

Quoted 23 lines · Geraldo Nascimento
Quoted 13 lines · Robin Murphy
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code enables only Lane 0 because pwr_cnt will be incremented on first call to the function. Use for-loop to enable all 4 lanes through GRF.

If this was really necessary, then surely it would also need the equivalent changes in rockchip_pcie_phy_power_off() too?

However, I'm not sure it *is* necessary - the NVMe on my RK3399 board happily claims to be using an x4 link, so I stuck a print of inst->index in this function, and sure enough I do see it being called for each instance already:

Quoted 5 lines
[    1.737479] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.1: power_on 0
[    1.738810] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.2: power_on 1
[    1.745193] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.3: power_on 2
[    1.745196] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.4: power_on 3

Hi Robin, and thanks for caring, it's excellent to rely on your extensive expertise on ARM in general and RK3399 specifically!

Quoted 6 lines

However, on my board I'm positive it does not work without proposed patch and I get stuck with x1 link without it.

There are currently very similar patches applied downstream to Armbian and OpenWRT so at least I'm confident that is not only my board which is quirky and other people experienced the same problem.

Ah, I put that print at the top of the function - on second look now I see that there's an awkward mix of per-lane and global data, and pwr_cnt is actually the latter. Sure enough, moving the print past that check I only see it once.

However, I still don't think blindly enabling all the lanes is the right thing to do either; I'd imagine something like the (untested) diff below would be more appropriate. That would then seem to balance with what power_off is doing.

Thanks,
Robin.

----->8-----

drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +4 -5
index bd44af36c67a..a34a983db16c 100644
@@ -160,11 +160,8 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
 
 	guard(mutex)(&rk_phy->pcie_mutex);
 
-	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt++) {
-		return 0;
-	}
-
-	err = reset_control_deassert(rk_phy->phy_rst);
+	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt++)
+		err = reset_control_deassert(rk_phy->phy_rst);
 	if (err) {
 		dev_err(&phy->dev, "deassert phy_rst err %d\n", err);
 		rk_phy->pwr_cnt--;
@@ -181,6 +178,8 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
 		     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
 				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
 				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + inst->index));
+	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt)
+		return 0;
 
 	/*
 	 * No documented timeout value for phy operation below,
#10 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 3/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

Quoted 4 lines · Robin Murphy

Ah, I put that print at the top of the function - on second look now I see that there's an awkward mix of per-lane and global data, and pwr_cnt is actually the latter. Sure enough, moving the print past that check I only see it once.

Hi Robin, thanks for re-testing and no worries.

Quoted 5 lines

However, I still don't think blindly enabling all the lanes is the right thing to do either; I'd imagine something like the (untested) diff below would be more appropriate. That would then seem to balance with what power_off is doing.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll make sure to test it appropriately before sending v6.

Thanks!
Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 33 lines

Thanks,
Robin.

----->8-----

drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +4 -5
index bd44af36c67a..a34a983db16c 100644
@@ -160,11 +160,8 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
 
  	guard(mutex)(&rk_phy->pcie_mutex);
 
-	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt++) {
-		return 0;
-	}
-
-	err = reset_control_deassert(rk_phy->phy_rst);
+	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt++)
+		err = reset_control_deassert(rk_phy->phy_rst);
  	if (err) {
  		dev_err(&phy->dev, "deassert phy_rst err %d\n", err);
  		rk_phy->pwr_cnt--;
@@ -181,6 +178,8 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_phy_power_on(struct phy *phy)
  		     HIWORD_UPDATE(!PHY_LANE_IDLE_OFF,
  				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_MASK,
  				   PHY_LANE_IDLE_A_SHIFT + inst->index));
+	if (rk_phy->pwr_cnt)
+		return 0;
 
  	/*
  	 * No documented timeout value for phy operation below,
#11 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 3/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Enable all four lanes

In reply to Geraldo Nascimento
Quoted 26 lines · Geraldo Nascimento
Quoted 13 lines · Robin Murphy
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Current code enables only Lane 0 because pwr_cnt will be incremented on first call to the function. Use for-loop to enable all 4 lanes through GRF.

If this was really necessary, then surely it would also need the equivalent changes in rockchip_pcie_phy_power_off() too?

However, I'm not sure it *is* necessary - the NVMe on my RK3399 board happily claims to be using an x4 link, so I stuck a print of inst->index in this function, and sure enough I do see it being called for each instance already:

Quoted 5 lines
[    1.737479] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.1: power_on 0
[    1.738810] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.2: power_on 1
[    1.745193] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.3: power_on 2
[    1.745196] phy phy-ff770000.syscon:pcie-phy.4: power_on 3

Hi Robin, and thanks for caring, it's excellent to rely on your extensive expertise on ARM in general and RK3399 specifically!

However, on my board I'm positive it does not work without proposed patch and I get stuck with x1 link without it.

Quoted 6 lines

There are currently very similar patches applied downstream to Armbian and OpenWRT so at least I'm confident that is not only my board which is quirky and other people experienced the same problem.

Thanks,
Geraldo Nascimento

Hello again Robin,

for reference, here's the commit for OpenWRT, originally from Armbian:
https://github.com/openwrt/openwrt/commit/2dc9801fe81ab3c092d2ca75e4c63f8d5eea46f5

Please note that the author of that commit specifically mentions a warm reboot is needed to trigger the "stuck on x1" behavior. That author took a different strategy than me, just reordering instead of using for-loop. I'm open for different strategies, but the report is real I assure you.

Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines

Thanks,
Robin.

#12 lore raw

RFC PATCH v5 4/4 phy: rockchip-pcie: Adjust read mask and write

In reply to Geraldo Nascimento

Section 17.6.10 of the RK3399 TRM "PCIe PIPE PHY registers Description" defines asynchronous strobe TEST_WRITE which should be enabled then disabled and seems to have been copy-pasted as of current. Adjust it. While at it, adjust read mask which should be the same as write mask.

---
 drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +2 -2
index 48bcc7d2b33b..35d2523ee776 100644
@@ -30,9 +30,9 @@
 #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_SHIFT    1
 #define PHY_CFG_DATA_MASK     0xf
 #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK     0x3f
-#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3ff
+#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3f
 #define PHY_CFG_WR_ENABLE     1
-#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    1
+#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    0
 #define PHY_CFG_WR_SHIFT      0
 #define PHY_CFG_WR_MASK       1
 #define PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK      0x10
Signature · 1 line
2.49.0
#13 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 4/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Adjust read mask and write

Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Section 17.6.10 of the RK3399 TRM "PCIe PIPE PHY registers Description" defines asynchronous strobe TEST_WRITE which should be enabled then disabled and seems to have been copy-pasted as of current. Adjust it.

FWIW that's a bit hard to make sense of, given that it bears no relation whatsoever to the naming used in the code :/

(Not least because the mapping of register fields to phy signals here is really a property of GRF_SOC_CON8 rather than the phy itself)

Quoted 1 line

While at it, adjust read mask which should be the same as write mask.

Which write mask? Certainly not PHY_CFG_WR_MASK... However as this definition is unused since 64cdc0360811 ("phy: rockchip-pcie: remove unused phy_rd_cfg function"), I don't see much point in touching it other than to remove it entirely. If it is the case that only the address field is significant for whatever a "read" operation actually means, well then that's just another job for ADDR_MASK (which I guess is what the open-coded business with PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK is actually doing...)

Thanks,
Robin.

Quoted 21 lines
---
  drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c | 4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +2 -2
index 48bcc7d2b33b..35d2523ee776 100644
@@ -30,9 +30,9 @@
  #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_SHIFT    1
  #define PHY_CFG_DATA_MASK     0xf
  #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK     0x3f
-#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3ff
+#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3f
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_ENABLE     1
-#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    1
+#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    0
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_SHIFT      0
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_MASK       1
  #define PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK      0x10
#14 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 4/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Adjust read mask and write

Quoted 10 lines · Robin Murphy
Quoted 3 lines · Geraldo Nascimento

Section 17.6.10 of the RK3399 TRM "PCIe PIPE PHY registers Description" defines asynchronous strobe TEST_WRITE which should be enabled then disabled and seems to have been copy-pasted as of current. Adjust it.

FWIW that's a bit hard to make sense of, given that it bears no relation whatsoever to the naming used in the code :/

(Not least because the mapping of register fields to phy signals here is really a property of GRF_SOC_CON8 rather than the phy itself)

Hi Robin,

will adjust for a better commit message, thank you.

Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 2 lines

While at it, adjust read mask which should be the same as write mask.

Which write mask? Certainly not PHY_CFG_WR_MASK... However as this definition is unused since 64cdc0360811 ("phy: rockchip-pcie: remove unused phy_rd_cfg function"), I don't see much point in touching it other than to remove it entirely. If it is the case that only the address field is significant for whatever a "read" operation actually means, well then that's just another job for ADDR_MASK (which I guess is what the open-coded business with PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK is actually doing...)

Oh, I already had agreed on Bjorn's suggestion to drop PHY_CFG_RD_MASK for good from code, but I appreciate your input too.

Thanks,
Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 26 lines

Thanks,
Robin.

Quoted 21 lines
---
  drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c | 4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-pcie.c +2 -2
index 48bcc7d2b33b..35d2523ee776 100644
@@ -30,9 +30,9 @@
  #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_SHIFT    1
  #define PHY_CFG_DATA_MASK     0xf
  #define PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK     0x3f
-#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3ff
+#define PHY_CFG_RD_MASK       0x3f
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_ENABLE     1
-#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    1
+#define PHY_CFG_WR_DISABLE    0
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_SHIFT      0
  #define PHY_CFG_WR_MASK       1
  #define PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK      0x10
#15 lore raw

Re: [RFC PATCH v5 4/4] phy: rockchip-pcie: Adjust read mask and write

In reply to Robin Murphy
Quoted 7 lines · Robin Murphy

Which write mask? Certainly not PHY_CFG_WR_MASK... However as this definition is unused since 64cdc0360811 ("phy: rockchip-pcie: remove unused phy_rd_cfg function"), I don't see much point in touching it other than to remove it entirely. If it is the case that only the address field is significant for whatever a "read" operation actually means, well then that's just another job for ADDR_MASK (which I guess is what the open-coded business with PHY_CFG_PLL_LOCK is actually doing...)

Just for the sake of posterity, Robin is right here, PHY_CFG_WR_MASK is just hardcoded to 1, and PHY_CFG_RD_MASK should have been the same as PHY_CFG_ADDR_MASK as Robin correctly pointed out.

Moot point since I already agreed with Bjorn and Robin to drop the read define, and Robin was kind enough to track the exact commit where the corresponding read function was removed. I re-injected that function from BSP into mainline for my own debugging though, that's why I caught the typo.

Thanks,
Geraldo Nascimento

Quoted 3 lines

Thanks,
Robin.