Re: [PATCH] Revert "PCI: dwc: Wait for link up only if link is started"
From: Johan Hovold
Date: Tue Jul 11 2023 - 02:52:05 EST
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 02:06:08AM +0900, Krzysztof Wilczyński wrote:
> > > > > > Finally, note that the intel-gw driver is the only driver currently not
> > > > > > providing a start_link callback and instead starts the link in its
> > > > > > host_init callback, and which may avoid an additional one-second timeout
> > > > > > during probe by making the link-up wait conditional. If anyone cares,
> > > > > > that can be done in a follow-up patch with a proper motivation.
> The whole conversation above about the intel-gw driver: would something
> need to be addressed here? Or can I pick the suggested fix?
No, it's just another indication that the offending commit was confused.
All mainline drivers already start the link before that
wait-for-link-up, so the commit in question makes very little sense.
That's why I prefer reverting it, so as to not pollute the git logs
(e.g. for git blame) with misleading justifications.
> > > My apologies for adding this regression in some of the SOCs.
> > > May I suggest to keep my patch and make the following change instead?
> > > This shall keep the existing behavior as is, and save the boot time
> > > for drivers that do not define the start_link()?
> [...]
>
> > I just realized that Fabio pushed exactly the same patch as I suggested
> > here:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230704122635.1362156-1-festevam@xxxxxxxxx/.
> > I think it is better we take it instead of reverting my commit.
>
> Will do. I will also make sure that we have correct attributions in place.
As I mentioned in the commit message, I think the commit should just be
reverted and if there's a valid argument to be made for a similar type
of change (without the breakage), that can be done as a follow-up with a
proper motivation.
Johan