From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
Cc: bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rafael@kernel.org, terry.bowman@amd.com, kanie@linux.alibaba.com,
olof@lixom.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 1/4] PCI: Assume control of portdrv-related features only when portdrv enabled
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 00:16:06 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aukZtm4aLMuH_JIB@wunner.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <840c7598-f988-428a-8bea-4d66b0f4f4d7@linux.intel.com>
On Mon, Nov 02, 2026 at 12:38:28PM -0800, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> On 11/2/2026 12:20 PM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> > This is now commit 6347fd9aee19 in Linus' tree and I think there's a problem:
[...]
> > The commit is setting the native_pcie_hotplug bit up front based on
> > CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS.
> >
> > But there's an if-clause at the top of get_port_device_capability() which
> > adds PCIE_PORT_SERVICE_HP to the port services used by a given PCIe port.
> >
> > Inside the if-clause is code to disable hotplug interrupts if the BIOS
> > left them enable.
> >
> > Since the commit, if CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS=n, the if-clause is no longer
> > entered and so the interrupts are no longer disabled.
>
> I don't think this case changed. get_port_device_capability() is in
> portdrv.c, which is only built with CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS=y:
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS) += pcieportdrv.o bwctrl.o
>
> So with CONFIG_PCIEPORTBUS=n, the if-clause was never entered, before or
> after this commit.
Okay, that convinces me, thanks for the explanation.
> Did you see a case where the interrupts stay enabled with this commit?
Nope, just thought "this looks fishy" when I rebased my development branch.
Thanks!
Lukas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-02 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-02 21:18 [PATCH v15 0/4] Simplify PCIe native ownership Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-02 21:18 ` [PATCH v15 1/4] PCI: Assume control of portdrv-related features only when portdrv enabled Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-03 1:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-02 20:20 ` Lukas Wunner
2026-11-02 20:38 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-11-02 23:16 ` Lukas Wunner [this message]
2026-10-02 21:18 ` [PATCH v15 2/4] PCI/ACPI: Tidy _OSC control bit checking Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-03 1:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 21:18 ` [PATCH v15 3/4] PCI/ACPI: Centralize pcie_ports_native checking Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-03 1:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-02 21:18 ` [PATCH v15 4/4] PCI: Centralize pci_aer_available() checking Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-03 1:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-05 18:04 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2026-10-05 22:40 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2026-10-06 17:51 ` [PATCH v15 0/4] Simplify PCIe native ownership Bjorn Helgaas
2026-10-06 18:38 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
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=aukZtm4aLMuH_JIB@wunner.de \
--to=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kanie@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=terry.bowman@amd.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