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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 799C3C43387 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 23:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D0E20850 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 23:35:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="MW/N4POS" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726614AbfAMXfP (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jan 2019 18:35:15 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-f193.google.com ([209.85.208.193]:34738 "EHLO mail-lj1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726598AbfAMXfP (ORCPT ); Sun, 13 Jan 2019 18:35:15 -0500 Received: by mail-lj1-f193.google.com with SMTP id u89-v6so17460045lje.1 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 15:35:14 -0800 (PST) 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=zjYM19yOEPsU+ud8BmeG3oivsix/FAcL+sYI9urX9rk=; b=MW/N4POSy7TdPq1Ne41HvuwWSN/MkcTZus15aM7ZGhQIjNzJWbNBjiUG7diGgq0dUH Ni9AnEopQ2Kkfxx5IScmMHrx0N2UDZyowdGJEdJ6q9H1Ku+BEfWC3CLt2Nj46Spmiqst FdMbK2XvPsU4uvSRMAw8VJbxJ8lC+q28P4gT0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zjYM19yOEPsU+ud8BmeG3oivsix/FAcL+sYI9urX9rk=; b=en3rX5nO+AdNNnfvU5wS2iv1BoVyqPNV8sdn9cT6div7UTPrgb83sTB0ESN3X6ckny U7VEeFoD/q66OKjxqRQ9M1rZUNcxODsh5+X9LOuRCPoRHnAGwj3oXqFH+RHvX6P5LdQg MSIw7SbymqgZOQl8JAZufK0i5lk9XEanPhSzyn9uc3n31tPUST+eLlnyRFze3a/N/DEh E0bb8DBoY6ARrTDf78bdma0sp9pe+nO5ZlYD60JdliNaSeX+s9SmfcjlKhYdMq+I0kVx LcHsqt+vmzHRs1VcstguPMaOTYwjUN2XcTT/h6I9MCHP7FHh/GwBNwXveEPAWYPdaASF kLFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukdHzFvCAMoR27V9dRRe+41piXvGAwNmu2WDuNYXoJqL0NSiO29g gLydPjluMFT5NNS1Z42bs401lwuRagxD6RaZQJEG/g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4XtCjqiIajtM6DrDZUytYdp9E/E7b6Z7d4cXqSMzj710KzdzYgUDLMZo7mhs6ReDo5+TQNKtIe01hiTmFvcSI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:710a:: with SMTP id m10-v6mr12818811ljc.66.1547422513407; Sun, 13 Jan 2019 15:35:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <024cc24efa7b99186750f90c91880b29357d379d.1547123182.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <94cd23a60c647020dd87a923684b59255b89f02c.1547123182.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <20190110125548.GA29612@lunn.ch> <8736q0irwy.fsf@tarshish> <20190110131912.GB29612@lunn.ch> <87zhs8h5ej.fsf@tarshish> <87pnt0vil3.fsf@tarshish> <20190113154028.GB4635@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20190113154028.GB4635@lunn.ch> From: Linus Walleij Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 00:35:01 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: armada8k: don't toggle reset twice To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Baruch Siach , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, Lorenzo Pieralisi , Sven Auhagen , Jason Cooper , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , linux-pci , Bartosz Golaszewski , Thierry Reding , Thomas Petazzoni , Bjorn Helgaas , Gregory Clement , Linux ARM , Sebastian Hesselbarth Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 4:40 PM Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Another look at this comment made me realize that we need comphy > > initialization support in the kernel for PCIe reset to work correctly. > > > > The workaround that this patch proposes will not solve the problem for > > v5.0, since the GPIO get_direction patch will only appear in v5.1. > > You could ask for it to be applied to v5.0 since a real fix depends on > it. If it makes a piece of hardware work that was working before and now is not working as a result of other kernel changes I would definately apply it because that is a clear cut regression. I am under the impression that this is the case? Yours, Linus Walleij