From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C6F9C433FE for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 16:17:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238999AbiEXQR6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2022 12:17:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35572 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237117AbiEXQR5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 May 2022 12:17:57 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x72a.google.com (mail-qk1-x72a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 025FA4FC4B for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 09:17:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x72a.google.com with SMTP id v11so15430629qkf.1 for ; Tue, 24 May 2022 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=BhPMIMKm3oqRgguHsuNtSYGSlsO/9zDolBwP/Ko+Row=; b=Vhfzv8hCjZGdMLfJpF1gHyYVorPhyAn1ailCZiEKjs+nKJ0bThReHko4o6O46XWDgU VAkArpBtXEp9FJAUT3sqGQ4Id6FTGzzooEVfWtbUXkTlbur0iDDQRfMIn5zxPfj9mewZ rIAia8s66hOTre43OheKAZdFwsVcPF1XxAtcDQ9CnI0DZbYMZEbCpQVwwQ9orWhYHXDe 3JIS+4KN70QQcYWSNyfPIhUUV+XzCm2lw6FxS+WlEF3FCKhLGya4y1FOLVSg5Un3kV/g MeYqI/bMlxHhXbupwFwnTgjP7BTlua0oF136OmJW5DSjV0e95fIiITh/9nheAGuxJzzu 06Ug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=BhPMIMKm3oqRgguHsuNtSYGSlsO/9zDolBwP/Ko+Row=; b=6LzQAh08XFM2Ugi5X4IOGng0AW7RELwzUnOAkjdOM8WObPsQJIxhZ3NsJrq0H+7+D5 jjzzwwZMW8c+wjut5oGlt9X/ZQhafxnmlCELNnI1uA5Xp1EnCFIZhDmVBQG3JbMFOoT+ HrO/N9Ws9Rt0Ioqajsfnruoh0Cl/ATIvgNletABWEAb4ZSnP+dcOAqZZuFMxNQvfDGXa 6JooBmXukend9xL5LQtWIooU0ERSDWXOt9jr5n2skkQcSRGx5QWAa59phpMntTtoi1sU 6rqDxv3DdYNDrB1W0M4Kl5Ii9uLAeBdtw6bUEl8wN2pJf4Xnk+uZowzIGu68T0z3tTR+ GBoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530GDrRwXhaJ2y72VBtwIiawKgZd/vhx9xVqPaGo/nlAJCiJIbqU biBMcqGUGs9mdSyzVvpq+ydLOniHCY3hDA10Qp7pAw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwTTqTx91ImC6D7Hp6mLcAdC2O5p8fHQuP1KGpeBu1WaJjeuMNNvAIZPIp/ycdtE0jQFIxnw5xleyY2Qq1Ginw= X-Received: by 2002:a37:6883:0:b0:6a3:42ae:e17b with SMTP id d125-20020a376883000000b006a342aee17bmr15565086qkc.59.1653409073112; Tue, 24 May 2022 09:17:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220523181836.2019180-1-dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> <20220524145258.GA242731@bhelgaas> In-Reply-To: <20220524145258.GA242731@bhelgaas> From: Dmitry Baryshkov Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 19:17:42 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 0/8] PCI: qcom: Fix higher MSI vectors handling To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Jingoo Han , Gustavo Pimentel , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Bjorn Helgaas , Stanimir Varbanov , Manivannan Sadhasivam , Vinod Koul , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 17:53, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 09:18:28PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > I have replied with my Tested-by to the patch at [2], which has landed > > in the linux-next as the commit 20f1bfb8dd62 ("PCI: qcom: > > Add support for handling MSIs from 8 endpoints"). However lately I > > noticed that during the tests I still had 'pcie_pme=nomsi', so the > > device was not forced to use higher MSI vectors. > > > > After removing this option I noticed that hight MSI vectors are not > > delivered on tested platforms. After additional research I stumbled upon > > a patch in msm-4.14 ([1]), which describes that each group of MSI > > vectors is mapped to the separate interrupt. Implement corresponding > > mapping. > > > > The first patch in the series is a revert of [2] (landed in pci-next). > > Either both patches should be applied or both should be dropped. > > 20f1bfb8dd62 is currently on Lorenzo's pci/qcom branch: > > $ git log --oneline remotes/lorenzo/pci/qcom > bddedfeb1315 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Add schema for sc7280 chipset > a6f2d6b1b349 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Specify reg-names explicitly > 81dab110d351 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Do not require resets on msm8996 platforms > 5383d16f0607 dt-bindings: PCI: qcom: Convert to YAML > 3ae93c5a9718 PCI: qcom: Fix unbalanced PHY init on probe errors > b986db29edbb PCI: qcom: Fix runtime PM imbalance on probe errors > dcd9011f591a PCI: qcom: Fix pipe clock imbalance > 3007ba831ccd PCI: qcom: Add SM8150 SoC support > f52d2a0f0d32 dt-bindings: pci: qcom: Document PCIe bindings for SM8150 SoC > 20f1bfb8dd62 PCI: qcom: Add support for handling MSIs from 8 endpoints > 312310928417 Linux 5.18-rc1 > > Is it safe for me to just drop that single patch before sending the > pull request for v5.19? Then target the rest of this series for > v5.20? Yes and yes. -- With best wishes Dmitry