On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 09:18:28PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> I have replied with my Tested-by to the patch at [2], which has landed
> in the linux-next as the commit 20f1bfb8dd62 ("PCI: qcom:
> Add support for handling MSIs from 8 endpoints"). However lately I
> noticed that during the tests I still had 'pcie_pme=nomsi', so the
> device was not forced to use higher MSI vectors.
>
> After removing this option I noticed that hight MSI vectors are not
> delivered on tested platforms. After additional research I stumbled upon
> a patch in msm-4.14 ([1]), which describes that each group of MSI
> vectors is mapped to the separate interrupt. Implement corresponding
> mapping.
>
> The first patch in the series is a revert of [2] (landed in pci-next).
> Either both patches should be applied or both should be dropped.
20f1bfb8dd62 is currently on Lorenzo's pci/qcom branch:
$ git log --oneline remotes/lorenzo/pci/qcom
bddedfeb1315 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Add schema for sc7280 chipset
a6f2d6b1b349 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Specify reg-names explicitly
81dab110d351 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Do not require resets on msm8996 platforms
5383d16f0607 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Convert to YAML
3ae93c5a9718 PCI: qcom: Fix unbalanced PHY init on probe errors
b986db29edbb PCI: qcom: Fix runtime PM imbalance on probe errors
dcd9011f591a PCI: qcom: Fix pipe clock imbalance
3007ba831ccd PCI: qcom: Add SM8150 SoC support
f52d2a0f0d32 dt-bindings: pci: qcom: Document PCIe bindings for SM8150 SoC
20f1bfb8dd62 PCI: qcom: Add support for handling MSIs from 8 endpoints
312310928417 Linux 5.18-rc1
Is it safe for me to just drop that single patch before sending the
pull request for v5.19? Then target the rest of this series for
v5.20?
Bjorn
