On Fri, 16 Feb 2024, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > You change the logic here in that the second conditional isn't run if the > > first has not. This is wrong, unclamping is not supposed to rely on LBMS. > > It is supposed to be always run and any failure has to be reported too, as > > a retraining error. > > Now that (I think) I fully understand the intent of the second > condition/block one additional question occurred to me. > > How is the 2nd condition even supposed to work in the current place when > firmware has pre-arranged the 2.5GT/s resctriction? Wouldn't the link come > up fine in that case and the quirk code is not called at all since the > link came up successfully? The quirk is called unconditionally from `pci_device_add', so an attempt to unclamp will always happen with a working link for qualifying devices. > Yet another thing in this quirk code I don't like is how it can leaves the > target speed to 2.5GT/s when the quirk fails to get the link working > (which actually does happen in the disconnection cases because DLLLA won't > be set so the target speed will not be restored). I chose to leave the target speed at the most recent setting, because the link doesn't work in that case anyway, so I concluded it doesn't matter, but reduces messing with the device; technically you should retrain again afterwards. I'm not opposed to changing this if you have a use case. Maciej
