From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 4E31D2F39CF; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 17:20:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769620855; cv=none; b=nw7xF4b4XcAFTMOnmo/92MdGbAF9Kl4b19XMp0Oz7jLxxxRm9u3Wy6BmkosXNlQKcnzPTMI89xP3Z4tHRBsFSQ0tXAUe/vPGpc8WMq7VvbU7pcJWE6rGp84wgAkPldGzTJ1CbyvEbhspJZC2S2QsVLPMdbPJIE+j/vhVGEyncW8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769620855; c=relaxed/simple; bh=aF+sEaIDM8apYXm//ht7oW6qKJ52vVW5aASWwS/WZxY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YHb9nomeI111dot8tsNV/HBODvvMtcimc4idM6c6CqgCvcBbk95wCsUoN6QEu08uNX00BGEyPfD8Gb+/K0wmdiayn4u1hlnHadadyvPgIyCKKgGMgfHTc5/GhSnYutzwsrY/DFp24PPo7+0eeF4xMiCAGrmIoZAzHoVqOXfKWOY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=jYuPDcWM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="jYuPDcWM" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0488C4CEF1; Wed, 28 Jan 2026 17:20:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1769620855; bh=aF+sEaIDM8apYXm//ht7oW6qKJ52vVW5aASWwS/WZxY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=jYuPDcWM8V8fT2TEcJm2xLLqK73UlUD3w7+NgOKSouE8BB2FBf9gp722YO2IFtGR+ RB3eUieiVh+3TsRQVjgj8mVzC5a34KYxCfgfNBvTejtX3s4MCUQWhRYl23t2PMtLT6 ySjTypxQOT6BG5zH9gavNEgHXV7cREo8PKaIV3RdhWXbV1EaZYyfCg1XPdGojDiC6i /He8uKPj5hdvoXws/Rx1JTf0G5XE7dqXjHTEiobKWPiQoetPhv0X1ISLBNFnrr24Ph K/MADiEZUXoVlZ6hz4+68onyMedVr2iGLdKBOXtgNp86M+S1OSxfnfSRjWPMiR5jqm ODamprbKvz5JQ== Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 11:20:53 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Haakon Bugge Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Niklas Schnelle , Alex Williamson , Johannes Thumshirn , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI: Initialize RCB from pci_configure_device Message-ID: <20260128172053.GA422887@bhelgaas> 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 05:08:23PM +0000, Haakon Bugge wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 02:09:53PM +0100, Håkon Bugge wrote: > >> Commit e42010d8207f ("PCI: Set Read Completion Boundary to 128 iff > >> Root Port supports it (_HPX)") fixed a bogus _HPX type 2 record, which > >> instructed program_hpx_type2() to set the RCB in an endpoint, > >> although it's RC did not have the RCB bit set. > >> ... > For this and the other commit, is it OK that I add > you as a co-developer? Aka: > > Co-developed-by: Bjorn Helgaas > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas > Signed-off-by: Håkon Bugge No need for co-developed-by, IMO this is just part of normal patch iteration. And I'll add my Signed-off-by when merging the patches. > > + pcie_capability_clear_and_set_word(dev, PCI_EXP_LNKCTL, > > + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RCB, > > + (rp_lnkctl & PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RCB) ? > > + PCI_EXP_LNKCTL_RCB : 0); > > Looks good to me! This will enforce the locked flavour of > pcie_capability_clear_and_set_word(). Is that an overkill? Probably no need for locking in this instance, but it's a per-device lock so there won't be any contention anyway. Bjorn