From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout-p-201.mailbox.org (mout-p-201.mailbox.org [80.241.56.171]) (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 24C9E2820B2; Mon, 22 Sep 2025 15:17:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.171 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758554268; cv=none; b=P1/nvkgC+18W/yJ2voTmtS4I0rzGQckVZNAmGQfCYZwClWAzGkaOUVQdqSyXrGbz9kbTUwVGvuPxNSoU6Yd3+wEazidKEhq8npJ1SVTtEvk9PDRBLSCBp5fwqlEcXsAtQxs4huHKYUDkZgl5wYPYS2804AQdevCIWL6qqLxN1mM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1758554268; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MdE303L2jf4nU+Hx7xSbllxvbBaD9/9k3x17y6Zdap0=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=APMY4VFmT/F1UcWwzp1lMXDrlmopXF3wTB/fiSXJBZz6uNzJA2+kMQOvngRMzRSQsalF+/5vaxk0oa+lNU2kuEUJsUTr3VxsfN6jzGKf+5t3ovSN+wBNUL/tuBqHchvc+0EElA1BIf9HnuXoDvrVFT2mJzWZUgzl5fOdTEWaKyc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b=X+m03wCm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.171 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b="X+m03wCm" Received: from smtp202.mailbox.org (smtp202.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:b231:465::202]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-201.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4cVmvC0rphz9sX2; Mon, 22 Sep 2025 17:17:43 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org; s=mail20150812; t=1758554263; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=p9HzCu9fxdKzZx3H4fanu6rYT9Lj42sxXC+higvSiso=; b=X+m03wCm7T3J49DqAL2mzsmySlMb21ew3ZO2T1oWUBX5YvXDl4D5/I9HL1H6IEPp5B06vn d6wgz9yLoaQeP2UDOL7HXZAOoLm75ofpr3LKURwMwK8mKu+DW4U/4nKMiOtYriwLN2gzc5 gpBuhXKF5PUjovrJTnP/rN0ApgQX23VTM8ka2bP8qiuAhYgT/Mqu0uuDb1xIl7A8TUoXQK d3o0NnE7DhNBvGtUHniE0Xk6sPkbQwOaEoULHUdJrYpYrefqwo7JnT/FBoVbwGz4vWl5t3 sJNfzBYd3e9sZSuuYIAri+ojiXrwh4h/M3Ieq3FDUf/5KRUBhfBMhWlikurJ8A== Message-ID: <3e6544a4-a202-4a1b-8cef-a864936db5f2@mailbox.org> Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2025 17:17:39 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: rcar-gen4: Fix inverted break condition in PHY initialization To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= , Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Magnus Damm , Manivannan Sadhasivam , Rob Herring , Yoshihiro Shimoda , linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org References: <20250915235910.47768-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org> <6fdc7d1e-8eaa-4244-a6b4-4a07e719dd73@mailbox.org> <12b54030-5505-416b-9e4e-2338263c5c7a@mailbox.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Marek Vasut In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-MBO-RS-ID: b9e099ba3a54f189132 X-MBO-RS-META: dtmfpu8wk5keobsmfim7o7csdd6p69oc On 9/22/25 12:10 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: Hello Geert, >> I have instead posted what I think are proper fixes for that SError: >> >> PCI: rcar-gen4: Add missing 1ms delay after PWR reset assertion >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pci/patch/20250918030058.330960-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org/ > > I used v3 instead. > While that patch seems to fix the SError after a hard reset (hardware > reset), it is not sufficient after a soft reset (typing "reboot"). > >> clk: renesas: cpg-mssr: Add missing 1ms delay into reset toggle callback >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-clk/patch/20250918030552.331389-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org/ > > This does not fix the SError, as expected (pcie-rcar-gen4.c does not > call reset_control_reset(), but reset_control_{,de}assert()). > >> clk: renesas: cpg-mssr: Read back reset registers to assure values latched >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-clk/patch/20250918030723.331634-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org/ > > I used v2 instead, which seems to fix the SError. Those three patches have to be used together, and this inverted break condition fix should be applied too. The first two are corrections which align the code behavior with reference manual. This inverted break fix is another correction. The last patch in the list above actually fixes the asynchronized reset behavior and turns it into synchronized reset behavior, therefore fixing the SError in the process. -- Best regards, Marek Vasut