[PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: rockchip: 5.0 GT/s speed may be dangerous

[PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: rockchip: 5.0 GT/s speed may be dangerous

[Geraldo Nascimento]

Dragan Simic already had warned me of potential issues with 5.0 GT/s
speed operation in Rockchip PCIe. However, in recent interactions
with Shawn Lin from Rockchip it came to my attention there's grave
danger in the unknown errata regarding 5.0 GT/s operational speed
of their PCIe core. Even if the odds are low, to contain any damage,
let's cover the remaining corner-cases where the default would lead
to 5.0 GT/s operation as well as add a comment to Root Complex driver
core, documenting this danger. Furthermore, remove redundant
declaration of max-link-speed from rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi

Signed-off-by: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@gmail.com>

---

Changes in v2:
- hard limit to 2.5 GT/s, not just warn
- add Reported-by: and Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic
- remove redundant declaration of max-link-speed from helios64 dts
- fix Link: of helios64 patch
- simplify RC mode comment
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aRhR79u5BPtRRFw3@geday/

Geraldo Nascimento (4):
  PCI: rockchip: limit RK3399 to 2.5 GT/s to prevent damage
  PCI: rockchip-host: comment danger of 5.0 GT/s speed
  arm64: dts: rockchip: remove dangerous max-link-speed from helios64
  arm64: dts: rockchip: remove redundant max-link-speed from nanopi-r4s

 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-kobol-helios64.dts |  1 -
 arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi    |  1 -
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c            |  3 +++
 drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c                 | 10 ++++++++--
 4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: rockchip: 5.0 GT/s speed may be dangerous

[Shawn Lin]

在 2025/11/18 星期二 5:46, Geraldo Nascimento 写道:
> Dragan Simic already had warned me of potential issues with 5.0 GT/s
> speed operation in Rockchip PCIe. However, in recent interactions
> with Shawn Lin from Rockchip it came to my attention there's grave
> danger in the unknown errata regarding 5.0 GT/s operational speed
> of their PCIe core. Even if the odds are low, to contain any damage,
> let's cover the remaining corner-cases where the default would lead
> to 5.0 GT/s operation as well as add a comment to Root Complex driver
> core, documenting this danger. Furthermore, remove redundant
> declaration of max-link-speed from rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi
> 
> Signed-off-by: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@gmail.com>
> 

Thanks for fixing these.

Acked-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>

> ---
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - hard limit to 2.5 GT/s, not just warn
> - add Reported-by: and Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic
> - remove redundant declaration of max-link-speed from helios64 dts
> - fix Link: of helios64 patch
> - simplify RC mode comment
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aRhR79u5BPtRRFw3@geday/
> 
> Geraldo Nascimento (4):
>    PCI: rockchip: limit RK3399 to 2.5 GT/s to prevent damage
>    PCI: rockchip-host: comment danger of 5.0 GT/s speed
>    arm64: dts: rockchip: remove dangerous max-link-speed from helios64
>    arm64: dts: rockchip: remove redundant max-link-speed from nanopi-r4s
> 
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-kobol-helios64.dts |  1 -
>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi    |  1 -
>   drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c            |  3 +++
>   drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c                 | 10 ++++++++--
>   4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: rockchip: 5.0 GT/s speed may be dangerous

[Dragan Simic]

Hello Geraldo,

Thanks a lot for the v2!  Please, see some comments below.

On Monday, November 17, 2025 22:46 CET, Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dragan Simic already had warned me of potential issues with 5.0 GT/s
> speed operation in Rockchip PCIe. However, in recent interactions
> with Shawn Lin from Rockchip it came to my attention there's grave
> danger in the unknown errata regarding 5.0 GT/s operational speed
> of their PCIe core. Even if the odds are low, to contain any damage,
> let's cover the remaining corner-cases where the default would lead
> to 5.0 GT/s operation as well as add a comment to Root Complex driver
> core, documenting this danger. Furthermore, remove redundant
> declaration of max-link-speed from rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi
> 
> Signed-off-by: Geraldo Nascimento <geraldogabriel@gmail.com>

As a note, Signed-off-by tags are redundant in cover letters, because
there's no source code in them that can actually be signed off.

> Changes in v2:
> - hard limit to 2.5 GT/s, not just warn
> - add Reported-by: and Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic
> - remove redundant declaration of max-link-speed from helios64 dts
> - fix Link: of helios64 patch
> - simplify RC mode comment
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aRhR79u5BPtRRFw3@geday/

Technically, you shouldn't have included my Reviewed-by tags in some
of the patches in the v2 of this series, because the patches were
either modified significantly since I gave my Reviewed-by for them
in the v1, or they were actually introduced in the v2.

However, I checked all four patches in the v2 again and everything
is still fine, so just to make sure, please feel free to include for
the entire series:

Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>

> Geraldo Nascimento (4):
>   PCI: rockchip: limit RK3399 to 2.5 GT/s to prevent damage
>   PCI: rockchip-host: comment danger of 5.0 GT/s speed
>   arm64: dts: rockchip: remove dangerous max-link-speed from helios64
>   arm64: dts: rockchip: remove redundant max-link-speed from nanopi-r4s
> 
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-kobol-helios64.dts |  1 -
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-nanopi-r4s.dtsi    |  1 -
>  drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip-host.c            |  3 +++
>  drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.c                 | 10 ++++++++--
>  4 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: rockchip: 5.0 GT/s speed may be dangerous

[Geraldo Nascimento]

On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 07:45:45AM +0100, Dragan Simic wrote:
> Technically, you shouldn't have included my Reviewed-by tags in some
> of the patches in the v2 of this series, because the patches were
> either modified significantly since I gave my Reviewed-by for them
> in the v1, or they were actually introduced in the v2.
> 
> However, I checked all four patches in the v2 again and everything
> is still fine, so just to make sure, please feel free to include for
> the entire series:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>

Hi Dragan,

Oops, sorry about that, and thanks for calling me out on this matter.
I'll definitely bear this in mind for future submissions.

Glad it worked out in the end.

Regards,
Geraldo Nascimento