From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com (smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com [185.125.188.121]) (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 5D37C25745 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:45:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.125.188.121 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718084745; cv=none; b=skD4zWYianii0Ft1pLWGNYwgLkD0VEWpKESA3XiK5BL0MHVmLHSgBPX0tUdIf5zZ1nreI5NknfbarQvZEOxzVwCXxfL20t1eVzUcVksw/29A511FinOuZ+OPi3uIzhdQRLWGNMFNXTLHoiPFjr5tWQhOlNDQq5lckERhzy7lVVw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718084745; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qNZ+/nRgL1qOziLTAxYNczXHVP0BwbIrCE3nKu4qc4I=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=C+t3h2EM4w67vPeD88O6GVTdaXDIaZmG3WuHmqh/wbTsvphDVvkvaoc/GAuqMqGHdUfQzxQmdJJTB0sBSec60Tk2Xt4nM0arv4ARDHCYNyxpww7WWuZ7LcoHA01zlmjMpZsNYW+rO3QU9PAgUfhVB8ngLYNS7S/Q80Ven3NEOoA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canonical.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canonical.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canonical.com header.i=@canonical.com header.b=iULaIfvR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.125.188.121 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=canonical.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=canonical.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=canonical.com header.i=@canonical.com header.b="iULaIfvR" Received: from [10.1.1.110] (unknown [103.229.218.199]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-relay-canonical-1.canonical.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5352A3F1C6; Tue, 11 Jun 2024 05:45:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=canonical.com; s=20210705; t=1718084741; bh=1uQHXhtS+FSETeH2hqizhIc/c/smCB4G/AydYNkP0wA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=iULaIfvRVc3jFrI3242MAXXKclEeiHSfcQruSnS5M0Izuor8FRo/kkS6N0HrTVDj2 LPjqfE0cuNz1ZpBa8alBxIEUIMT249UC+YNmyW5rBzz2DPNaGbTfUns/1i9VHFvVV6 x1gof4Y0XOw6aXQbY0lP2VfFx+C15jP/9qKtaO5Y5czJS9q6B6oKi7SNGR8914m5vH 2p91G6RknJz8PkAh/eM30E4WxOYv5svrLJpZtVbbi2LPkTag6HMtmUGZtPB6InHZ6D E8G0hMuOBViC5fSCFVATHHQHG+KVVyDr7wQCb5kg3IU8NZECb5gmbvCf9CHx3KrRDq 95L8n3MziKSPA== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:45:28 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [iwl-net][PATCH] Revert "e1000e: move force SMBUS near the end of enable_ulp function" To: "Zhang, Rui" , "pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "naamax.meir@linux.intel.com" , "Ruinskiy, Dima" , "Lifshits, Vitaly" , "kuba@kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" , "Nguyen, Anthony L" , "Neftin, Sasha" , "edumazet@google.com" , "pabeni@redhat.com" Cc: "Keller, Jacob E" , "horms@kernel.org" , "Brandt, Todd E" , "dmummenschanz@web.de" , "regressions@lists.linux.dev" References: <20240610013222.12082-1-hui.wang@canonical.com> <6ec4337f-7bf4-442d-8eca-128e528fde2a@molgen.mpg.de> <98ccb75d7ef48c182425f130e0b2ececeec630ec.camel@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Hui Wang In-Reply-To: <98ccb75d7ef48c182425f130e0b2ececeec630ec.camel@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 6/10/24 22:14, Zhang, Rui wrote: > On Mon, 2024-06-10 at 08:36 +0200, Paul Menzel wrote: >> Dear Hui, >> >> >> >> Naama also added Tested-by lines two both commits in question. Could >> Intel’s test coverage please extended to the problem at hand? >> >> Acked-by: Paul Menzel > Plus that, > 1. Todd and I can test with upstream + this patch to confirm that > a. the regression for Todd is gone. > b. the s2idle failure for me is back > 2. I can test with upstream + this patch + revert of commit > 861e8086029e (e1000e: move force SMBUS from enable ulp function to > avoid PHY loss issue) to confirm s2idle is working again. > > thanks, > rui Thanks. > >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Paul