From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
Cc: Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@kernel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
linux-ide@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ahci: clean up intel_pcs_quirk
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2024 08:05:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240210060502.GW8454@black.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240209130307.39113-1-cassel@kernel.org>
Hi,
On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 02:03:06PM +0100, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> The comment in front of board_ahci_pcs7 is completely wrong.
> It claims that board_ahci_pcs7 is needing the quirk, but in fact,
> the logic implemented in ahci_intel_pcs_quirk() is the exact opposite,
> only board_ahci_pcs7 is _excluded_ from the quirk.
>
> This way of implementing a quirk is unconventional in several ways:
> First of all because it has a board ID for which the quirk should _not_ be
> applied (board_ahci_pcs7), instead of the usual way where we have a board
> ID for which the quirk should be applied.
>
> The second reason is that other than only excluding board_ahci_pcs7 from
> the quirk, PCI devices that make use of the generic entry in ahci_pci_tbl
> (which matches on AHCI class code) are also excluded.
>
> This can of course lead to very subtle breakage, and did indeed do so in:
> commit 104ff59af73a ("ata: ahci: Add Tiger Lake UP{3,4} AHCI controller"),
> which added an explicit entry with board_ahci_low_power to ahci_pci_tbl.
>
> This caused many users to complain that their SATA drives disappeared.
> The logical assumption was of course that the issue was related to LPM,
> and was therefore reverted in commit 6210038aeaf4 ("ata: ahci: Revert
> "ata: ahci: Add Tiger Lake UP{3,4} AHCI controller"").
>
> It took a lot of time to figure out that this was all completely unrelated
> to LPM, and was instead caused by an unconventional Intel quirk.
>
> Clean up the quirk so that it behaves like other quirks, i.e. define a
> board where the quirk is applied. Platforms that were using
> board_ahci_pcs7 are converted to use board_ahci, this is safe since the
> boards were identical, and board_ahci_pcs7 did not define any custom
> port_ops.
>
> This way, new Intel platforms can be added using the correct "board_ahci"
> board, without getting any unexpected quirks applied.
>
> This means that we currently have some modern platforms defined that are
> using the Intel PCS quirk, but that is identical to the behavior that
> was there before this commit.
Right, I think with this one we can actually just drop those "modern"
entries and use the SATA PCI class since that is also "board_ahci",
therefore there is no need to add any new PCI IDs to the driver (unless
it requires some special quirks).
> No functional changes intended.
>
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=217114
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-10 6:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-09 13:03 [PATCH v2] ahci: clean up intel_pcs_quirk Niklas Cassel
2024-02-09 18:23 ` Dan Williams
2024-02-09 19:30 ` Niklas Cassel
2024-02-09 21:32 ` Dan Williams
2024-02-10 6:05 ` Mika Westerberg [this message]
2024-02-13 10:39 ` Niklas Cassel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240210060502.GW8454@black.fi.intel.com \
--to=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cassel@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dlemoal@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox