From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3413B21443B; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 16:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730306519; cv=none; b=gdYGiQheugtyXGWafDuj1qtK6cnq9QGBfCES2UjhCQzXyCZKw95FpGTw6Ha0UK5XI/GWpv1sOUngL2EBCzbsu3qwtp63HGCH/wFDZoOyU0i8Hsk4AFl3bGjQd9tt06wrRMh17GpbGTE+QKNtzq3u2miVpDdCoYiLY28XG7aZsIA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730306519; c=relaxed/simple; bh=B3Cv7vdNPxKLmEpv+ochTFb7si+5bh3/r5+EkHPjJJA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=TUl1r0DIPQ8Gu7SjDttETOoibjCDychyBD/iwWT3sechUIE4bbUOPYY1Ebcz1dEEO+RnCTO906hK9qBtpGeqd3vqyDfU6D1kk63nyf/aFdo1UksKOteoWARawIsXIdVQZMvNpOtcLRzJT1sfINlgXd87WOKF7BaE9TSsNsvMPNg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=a59x0CjD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="a59x0CjD" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1730306517; x=1761842517; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=B3Cv7vdNPxKLmEpv+ochTFb7si+5bh3/r5+EkHPjJJA=; b=a59x0CjD0a7I5KH/aNyegLaW6jIbfIYusLlTB6ukdWkTdq/s/cU95OwG bWj4CYLVum43gxQ0EW5kIxGH1gJTIhRuBQX0+X1eTJSgyZuo3oWKJsTm+ E4Bu8tQamG3NDD2lfgeO0LoWGlwclbF7u/M3EixYaqtkyQdGQ71VNl0yf RGtu50hB+O8Pqa3GPclJASUN6GEWU22AkK6hmxBRCH1u5uTqcqtUy3eVs aOSwgusw0FERfOpPG1paNqJMoePMmu6BllTZz+M0WFxH/VS9d/VSs5OKC QMK0QC0VDDSfh8SeqrXs9Df7938CxvW4Fxam2sDvU0ov/KAWsPIN1sruK g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: y4w+HwI7QNWf5NrdsqTIbw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: pdi/FOSMRtig4VqShafUaA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11241"; a="17663752" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,245,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="17663752" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by fmvoesa110.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Oct 2024 09:41:56 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: eV3frLhsSNKUTK4lei1d3w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: iA/9olc6TFSG9S0nYKlt2w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.11,245,1725346800"; d="scan'208";a="119825117" Received: from black.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.28]) by orviesa001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Oct 2024 09:41:54 -0700 Received: by black.fi.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 54C4D1CF; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:41:52 +0200 (EET) Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:41:52 +0200 From: Mika Westerberg To: Lukas Wunner Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Esther Shimanovich , Bjorn Helgaas , Rajat Jain , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Mario Limonciello , Ilpo =?utf-8?B?SsOkcnZpbmVu?= , iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] PCI: Detect and trust built-in Thunderbolt chips Message-ID: <20241030164152.GU275077@black.fi.intel.com> References: <20240910-trust-tbt-fix-v5-1-7a7a42a5f496@chromium.org> <20241030001524.GA1180712@bhelgaas> <20241030113108.GT275077@black.fi.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 02:11:31PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > IMHO this should be made generic enough that allows device tree based > > systems to take advantage of this right from the get-go. Note also there > > is already "external-facing" device tree property that matches the ACPI > > one defined in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pci/pci.txt. > > The workaround implemented by Esther's patch (only) becomes necessary > because OEMs followed Microsoft's spec blindly and put the property > below the Root Port, instead of the Downstream Port. Honestly I don't know how else that could be implemented otherwise without changing that definition (which BTW came from Intel originally). They did the exact correct thing. The only real problem is that Linux interprets it in different way.