Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: PCI: brcmstb: Add two optional props

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 4/12/23 08:37, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 10:14:46AM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote:
On Wed, Apr 12, 2023 at 7:56 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 12/04/2023 13:49, Florian Fainelli wrote:

On 4/12/2023 1:09 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 11/04/2023 18:59, Jim Quinlan wrote:
Regarding "brcm,enable-l1ss":

    The Broadcom STB/CM PCIe HW -- a core that is also used by RPi SOCs --
    requires the driver probe() to deliberately place the HW one of three
    CLKREQ# modes:

    (a) CLKREQ# driven by the RC unconditionally
    (b) CLKREQ# driven by the EP for ASPM L0s, L1
    (c) Bidirectional CLKREQ#, as used for L1 Substates (L1SS).

    The HW+driver can tell the difference between downstream devices that
    need (a) and (b), but does not know when to configure (c).  Further, the
    HW may cause a CPU abort on boot if guesses wrong regarding the need for
    (c).  So we introduce the boolean "brcm,enable-l1ss" property to indicate
    that (c) is desired.  Setting this property only makes sense when the
    downstream device is L1SS-capable and the OS is configured to activate
    this mode (e.g. policy==superpowersave).

    This property is already present in the Raspian version of Linux, but the
    upstream driver implementaion that will follow adds more details and

typo, implementation

    discerns between (a) and (b).

Regarding "brcm,completion-timeout-us"

    Our HW will cause a CPU abort if the L1SS exit time is longer than the
    PCIe transaction completion abort timeout.  We've been asked to make this
    configurable, so we are introducing "brcm,completion-timeout-us".

Signed-off-by: Jim Quinlan <jim2101024@xxxxxxxxx>

What happened here? Where is the changelog?

It is in the cover letter:

but it does not look like the cover letter was copied to you or Rob.

As you said, I did not get it.

Yes, sorry about that; I use a wrapper over the "cocci_cc" script and
I need to modify one or both scripts to send the cover to the
superset of recipients in the constituent commits.

Try out 'b4'. It's much easier.

In any case, I don't read cover letters. Changes to a patch belong with
the patch.

This is not what most other maintainers do, and there does not appear to be a general consensus amongst maintainers that the changes belong in the individual patches, or in the cover letter. Some trees like the networking tree do merge commits of patch sets where the cover letter is used as part of the merge commit message. Other maintainers don't, and some want the change log after the '---' and some do not.

[Index of Archives]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux USB]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Greybus]

  Powered by Linux