On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 06:29:54PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > Hi Lorenzo, > > On Thu, 13 Sep 2018 10:15:34 +0100 Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 04:57:22PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 11:04:08 +0800 Jisheng Zhang wrote: > > > > > > > When programming inbound/outbound atu, we call usleep_range() after > > > > each checking PCIE_ATU_ENABLE bit. Unfortunately, the atu programming > > > > can be called in atomic context: > > > > > > > > inbound atu programming could be called through > > > > pci_epc_write_header() > > > > =>dw_pcie_ep_write_header() > > > > =>dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu() > > > > > > > > outbound atu programming could be called through > > > > pci_bus_read_config_dword() > > > > =>dw_pcie_rd_conf() > > > > =>dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu() > > > > > > > > Fix this issue by calling mdelay() instead. > > > > > > Any comments about this patch? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Jisheng > > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: f8aed6ec624f ("PCI: dwc: designware: Add EP mode support") > > > > Fixes: d8bbeb39fbf3 ("PCI: designware: Wait for iATU enable") > > > > Can you split it into two patches and repost it please ? It will make > > everyone's life easier to backport it if there is need, I will apply > > then. > > IIUC, the purpose of this split is to make the backport to stable easier. If > so, I realise that the Fixes tags were not enough, we missed: > > Fixes: edd45e396829 ("PCI: dwc: designware: Move _unroll configurations to a > separate function") > > I'm not sure how to handle this case. From another side, the issue to be > fixed is the same: call sleep in atomic context in the same driver, is it > better to use one patch? > > As for stable tree, I could send out separate patches instead. What do you > think? OK, I will merge the patch as-is and we will handle the stable backports when Greg sends the patches out. Lorenzo