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 F0F84247280; Thu, 19 Feb 2026 22:53:23 +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=1771541604; cv=none; b=msX3+iQmj3EJ3Ppl/prypTR8bKsqto6KVCav5H1UtIofvyQ98XN9X6e7Eaq98CP79sopMSiqOpKyPYo8+CjC749EqhrhVXNRRmEXhx9NPYx66X9DNVFzvu4eWfEIMKC+Fs6Ci76W3GKyR27Mt8UJ9Ml6T5Y7WMyAiDEwJobk1lc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1771541604; c=relaxed/simple; bh=BcdVDXas1f1tZ2Svg0e2enRiHCFMkAutX4j7j/UFx84=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RT5KjXHjHei9oeytJ3BBhPs/HuX35win3Vuzk2Z4KKNGG947WBqoYCcnTNR6blS2Fv3qP7B6xGoeYcbFp5/DLE8h7NyIXsIJsnqbKT5YCFNMV/BlWNOa9kAP1MpW//jl1Gp0FA1+ORnQBciMBXbel2UcLGReraqyEIWf9Meq62g= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=al9X7+8t; 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="al9X7+8t" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5F407C4CEF7; Thu, 19 Feb 2026 22:53:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1771541603; bh=BcdVDXas1f1tZ2Svg0e2enRiHCFMkAutX4j7j/UFx84=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=al9X7+8tyTapEaKc7xpTsZmez0ZOZ/X1mqPIUW64RCGqc5i+QnNdrcvCOpkU/dX/P xLEV/OlEaWBzOqEPAFzjfbFriY1V3CM4xfrhpdUDLaCqlOgQZ0tZLRnAIr2h+dz5dI unZHCEI17wbnq/G8F8/iGyRN+VnrRIW/Z4CAzp57BHX41mlwD1Tp2pzG49SIGH3/Rq aRzXBjaipHGiKWt/xEYAwCRJN0qAXG3cgo4MTkhSMUMmsK3MMEp3ydtCCpcmOIBWat Li0yWu+yD20T0sDeNH7YSWwWw6ldJJexpShSFQU6YKXuRNK5eFooRpim0SkH67T33r tByx9YzrG2eaw== Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2026 16:53:22 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Matthew W Carlis Cc: ahuang12@lenovo.com, alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com, ashishk@purestorage.com, bhelgaas@google.com, guojinhui.liam@bytedance.com, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com, jiwei.sun.bj@qq.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, lukas@wunner.de, macro@orcam.me.uk, msaggi@purestorage.com, sconnor@purestorage.com, sunjw10@lenovo.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: Always lift 2.5GT/s restriction in PCIe failed link retraining Message-ID: <20260219225322.GA3501275@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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260219220959.19900-1-mattc@purestorage.com> On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 03:09:59PM -0700, Matthew W Carlis wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2026, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > Applied to pci/enumeration for v7.1, thanks. This will be rebased > > after v7.0-rc1. > > We're heading down a path here where we keep working around the > work-around & now have decided that the kernel will be meddling with > the link on potentially all of the PCIe devices in the world. The > trade off that we're making here to accommodate a device specific > interaction doesn't seem like the right direction. > > Can we reconsider my patch that restricts the link retrain mechanism > to the specific device that created the work-around? > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250702052430.13716-1-mattc@purestorage.com/ I think we already at least potentially meddle with the link on every device, and it definitely makes me nervous. I would like it much better if it's possible to limit it to devices with known defects. I'll defer these for now and we can see if a consensus emerges.