From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] PCI/PTM: Do not enable PTM solely based on the capability existense
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 10:53:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aQCSqKm8gaUtuD-6@wunner.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251028060427.2163115-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 07:04:27AM +0100, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> It is not advisable to enable PTM solely based on the fact that the
> capability exists. Instead there are separate bits in the capability
> register that need to be set for the feature to be enabled for a given
> component (this is suggestion from Intel PCIe folks):
>
> - PCIe Endpoint that has PTM capability must to declare requester
> capable
> - PCIe Switch Upstream Port that has PTM capability must declare
> at least responder capable
> - PCIe Root Port must declare root port capable.
[...]
> This happens because Linux sees the PTM capability and blindly enables
> PTM which then causes the AER error to trigger.
>
> Fix this by enabling PTM only if the above described criteria is met.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
A stable designation might be merited, it looks like we've been doing
this wrong since forever:
Fixes: 9bb04a0c4e26 ("PCI: Add Precision Time Measurement (PTM) support")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v4.9+
A spec reference in the commit message may also be helpful:
PCIe r7.0 sec 6.21.1 figure 6-21
I guess Bjorn could add those when applying if he deems them necessary,
so probably no reason to respin just for that.
Thanks,
Lukas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-28 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-28 6:04 [PATCH v2] PCI/PTM: Do not enable PTM solely based on the capability existense Mika Westerberg
2025-10-28 9:53 ` Lukas Wunner [this message]
2025-10-28 17:06 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-10-29 5:33 ` Mika Westerberg
2025-10-29 10:53 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-10-29 11:20 ` Mika Westerberg
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=aQCSqKm8gaUtuD-6@wunner.de \
--to=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
/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