On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 04:31:13PM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote: > On 7/18/2023 4:39 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 08:03:47AM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote: > > > On 7/14/2023 3:09 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 03:56:04PM +0530, Vidya Sagar wrote: > > > > > This reverts commit 4fb8e46c1bc4 ("PCI: tegra194: Enable > > > > > support for 256 Byte payload"). > > > > > > > > > > Consider a PCIe hierarchy with a PCIe switch and a device connected > > > > > downstream of the switch that has support for MPS which is the minimum in > > > > > the hierarchy, and root port programmed with an MPS in its DevCtl register > > > > > that is greater than the minimum. In this scenario, the default bus > > > > > configuration of the kernel i.e. "PCIE_BUS_DEFAULT" doesn't configure the > > > > > MPS settings in the hierarchy correctly resulting in the device with > > > > > support for minimum MPS in the hierarchy receiving the TLPs of size more > > > > > than that. Although this can be addressed by appending "pci=pcie_bus_safe" > > > > > to the kernel command line, it doesn't seem to be a good idea to always > > > > > have this commandline argument even for the basic functionality to work. > > > > > > > > I think this has some irrelevant detail (IIUC the problem should > > > > happen even without a switch) and could be more specific (I think the > > > > problem case is RP MPS=256, EP only supports MPS=128). > > > > > > The issue is present only if there is a switch. > > > > So if there's no switch, and an EP that only supports MPS=128, the PCI > > core changes the RP MPS setting to 128? Just based on reading the > > Yes. The code after the if condition here takes care of that. > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/pci/probe.c?h=v6.5-rc2#n2049 Oh, right, thanks. I vaguely remember the logic that if the immediate parent is a Root Port, there are no other branches in the hierarchy to worry about, so we can just configure the Root Port MPS to match the device. > > code, I thought we would leave RP MPS=256 and EP MPS=128, which would > > be a problem. But maybe the PCI core changes the RP down to MPS=128? > > > > Bjorn