Re: [PATCH v18 08/20] PCI: dwc: Add dw_pcie_link_set_max_link_width()

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

 



On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 01:53:11AM +0300, Serge Semin wrote:
> Your attention is required in this thread. Could you please give us
> your resolution regarding the issue denoted in my last comment?

Sorry I missed this and thanks for pinging me.  Lorenzo and Krzysztof
take care of the native controller drivers so I don't pay close
attention.

> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 01:50:59AM +0000, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > > From: Serge Semin, Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 8:54 AM
> > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 04:44:40PM +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > > > To improve code readability, add dw_pcie_link_set_max_link_width().
> > > > ...

> > > > @@ -1009,49 +1049,5 @@ void dw_pcie_setup(struct dw_pcie *pci)
> > > >  	val |= PORT_LINK_DLL_LINK_EN;
> > > >  	dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, PCIE_PORT_LINK_CONTROL, val);
> > > >
> > > > -	if (!pci->num_lanes) {
> > > > -		dev_dbg(pci->dev, "Using h/w default number of lanes\n");
> > > > -		return;
> > > > -	}
> > > > -
> > > > -	/* Set the number of lanes */
> > > 
> > > > -	val &= ~PORT_LINK_FAST_LINK_MODE;
> > > 
> > > My series contains the patch which drops this line:
> > <snip URL>
> > > So either pick my patch up and add it to your series or still pick it up
> > > but with changing the authorship and adding me under the Suggested-by
> > > tag with the email-address I am using to review your series. Bjorn,
> > > what approach would you prefer? Perhaps alternative?

I don't really see the argument here.  AFAICT, Yoshihiro's patch
(https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230721074452.65545-9-yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx)
is a trivial refactoring to make dw_pcie_link_set_max_link_width(),
which might be reused elsewhere later, which seems perfectly fine.

It'd be fine with me to add a little detail in the commit log to
reference the Synopsys manual, which I don't have.  But doesn't seem
like a big deal to me.

Dropping the PORT_LINK_FAST_LINK_MODE mask seems like a separate
question that should be in a separate patch.
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20230611192005.25636-6-Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
says it's redundant, so it sounds more like a cleanup than a fix.

> > > Note the patch I am talking about doesn't contain anything what
> > > couldn't be merged in. The problem with my series is in completely
> > > another dimension.
> > > 
> > > Bjorn

Despite the "Bjorn" that looks like a signature, I did not write the
"Note the patch ..." paragraph above.

Bjorn



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SOC]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux