On Thu, Aug 08, 2024 at 10:32:17AM +0800, 412574090@xxxxxxx wrote: You inadvertently trimmed out Ilpo's attribution. Some hints at https://subspace.kernel.org/etiquette.html There should be a line like this: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 05:38:41PM +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: ... > > These should be in numerical order. so it's clear who wrote what. > > On Tue, 6 Aug 2024, 412574090@xxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > From: weiyufeng <weiyufeng@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > PCIe r6.0, sec 7.7.7.1, defines a new 64.0 GT/s PCIe Extended Capability > > > ID,Add the define for PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT for drivers that will want > > > this whilst doing Gen6 accesses. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: weiyufeng <weiyufeng@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h | 1 + > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h b/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h > > > index 94c00996e633..cc875534dae1 100644 > > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h > > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/pci_regs.h > > > @@ -741,6 +741,7 @@ > > > #define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DLF 0x25 /* Data Link Feature */ > > > #define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_16GT 0x26 /* Physical Layer 16.0 GT/s */ > > > #define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_32GT 0x2A /* Physical Layer 32.0 GT/s */ > > > +#define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT 0x31 /* Physical Layer 64.0 GT/s */ > > > #define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DOE 0x2E /* Data Object Exchange */ > > > These should be in numerical order. > In PCIe r6.0, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT value is 0x31. Right. The #defines just need to be sorted in numerical order (PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT would be last, after PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DOE) because PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX is defined to be the one with the highest numerical value, and it's hard to find that when they're not sorted. > > > #define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DOE > > > This was not adapted?? > PCIe r6.0, sec 7.7.7.1 have this definition。 I think Ilpo meant that if we add "#define PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT 0x31", PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_MAX needs to be updated from PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DOE to PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_PL_64GT. Bjorn
