From: Kevin Xie <kevin.xie@starfivetech.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <mason.huo@starfivetech.com>,
<leyfoon.tan@starfivetech.com>, <minda.chen@starfivetech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] PCI: Add PCIE_CONFIG_REQUEST_WAIT_MS waiting time value
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:41:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <95ec1fa5-1ab1-439f-96db-0ae2989915ce@starfivetech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231130183504.GA487377@bhelgaas>
On 2023/12/1 2:35, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 06:03:55PM +0800, Kevin Xie wrote:
>> On 2023/11/30 7:21, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 09:45:08AM +0800, Kevin Xie wrote:
>> >> Add the PCIE_CONFIG_REQUEST_WAIT_MS marco to define the minimum waiting
>> >> time between sending the first configuration request to the device and
>> >> exit from a conventional reset (or after link training completes).
>> >
>> > s/marco/macro/
>> >
>> > List the first event before the second one, i.e., the delay is from
>> > exit from reset to the config request.
>>
>> OK,I will use "from A to B" instead of "between A and B".
>
> That's not my point.
>
> My point was you said "between B (config request) and A (exit from
> reset)". "A" happens first, so it should be mentioned first.
>
Got it.
>> > I assume there are follow-on patches that actually use this? Can we
>> > make this the first patch in a series so we know we don't have an
>> > unused macro lying around?
>>
>> Yes, we will use the marco in the next version of our PCIe controller patches.
>> Here is the link of current version patch series:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231115114912.71448-20-minda.chen@starfivetech.com/T/#u
>>
>> Do you mean that I should put this patch back to the above series as
>> one of the separate patches?
>
> Yes, please. Handling them as a group is less overhead and helps
> avoid merge issues (if they're all in a series there's no possibility
> that the user gets merged before the macro itself).
>
OK, I will put the patch back with these changes.
> Bjorn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-01 1:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-24 1:45 [PATCH v1] PCI: Add PCIE_CONFIG_REQUEST_WAIT_MS waiting time value Kevin Xie
2023-11-29 23:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-11-30 10:03 ` Kevin Xie
2023-11-30 18:35 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-12-01 1:41 ` Kevin Xie [this message]
2023-11-29 23:22 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-11-30 11:13 ` Kevin Xie
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=95ec1fa5-1ab1-439f-96db-0ae2989915ce@starfivetech.com \
--to=kevin.xie@starfivetech.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=leyfoon.tan@starfivetech.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mason.huo@starfivetech.com \
--cc=minda.chen@starfivetech.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