On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 02:06:08AM +0900, Krzysztof Wilczyński wrote: > > > > > > Finally, note that the intel-gw driver is the only driver currently not > > > > > > providing a start_link callback and instead starts the link in its > > > > > > host_init callback, and which may avoid an additional one-second timeout > > > > > > during probe by making the link-up wait conditional. If anyone cares, > > > > > > that can be done in a follow-up patch with a proper motivation. > The whole conversation above about the intel-gw driver: would something > need to be addressed here? Or can I pick the suggested fix? No, it's just another indication that the offending commit was confused. All mainline drivers already start the link before that wait-for-link-up, so the commit in question makes very little sense. That's why I prefer reverting it, so as to not pollute the git logs (e.g. for git blame) with misleading justifications. > > > My apologies for adding this regression in some of the SOCs. > > > May I suggest to keep my patch and make the following change instead? > > > This shall keep the existing behavior as is, and save the boot time > > > for drivers that do not define the start_link()? > [...] > > > I just realized that Fabio pushed exactly the same patch as I suggested > > here: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230704122635.1362156-1-festevam@xxxxxxxxx/. > > I think it is better we take it instead of reverting my commit. > > Will do. I will also make sure that we have correct attributions in place. As I mentioned in the commit message, I think the commit should just be reverted and if there's a valid argument to be made for a similar type of change (without the breakage), that can be done as a follow-up with a proper motivation. Johan
