On 8/8/22 21:17, luca.ceresoli@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > +Mux-locked caveats > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > + > +When using a mux-locked mux, be aware of the following restrictions: > + > +* If you build a topology with a mux-locked mux being the parent > + of a parent-locked mux, this might break the expectation from the > + parent-locked mux that the root adapter is locked during the > + transaction. > + > +* It is not safe to build arbitrary topologies with two (or more) > + mux-locked muxes that are not siblings, when there are address > + collisions between the devices on the child adapters of these > + non-sibling muxes. > + > + I.e. the select-transfer-deselect transaction targeting e.g. device > + address 0x42 behind mux-one may be interleaved with a similar > + operation targeting device address 0x42 behind mux-two. The > + intension with such a topology would in this hypothetical example > + be that mux-one and mux-two should not be selected simultaneously, > + but mux-locked muxes do not guarantee that in all topologies. > + These two sentences in n. 2) can be combined into a single paragraph. Also, did you mean s/intension/intention/? -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
