Messages in this thread | | | From | Ethan Zhao <> | Date | Tue, 20 Oct 2020 16:33:14 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] pciehp: Add check for DL_ACTIVE bit in pciehp_check_link_status() |
| |
On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 2:33 PM Sanjay R Mehta <Sanju.Mehta@amd.com> wrote: > > From: Sanjay R Mehta <sanju.mehta@amd.com> > > if DL_ACTIVE bit is set it means that there is no need to check > PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT bit, as DL_ACTIVE would have set only if the link > is already trained. Hence adding a check which takes care of this > scenario. Sorry, I couldn't understand the logic here. if DL_ACTIVE was set, PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT is to be cleared, vice versa. why need
(lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT) && !(lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_DLLLA)
Double safe ?
Thanks, Ethan
> > Signed-off-by: Sanjay R Mehta <sanju.mehta@amd.com> > --- > drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c > index 53433b37e181..8ab2f6a2f388 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c > @@ -309,7 +309,8 @@ int pciehp_check_link_status(struct controller *ctrl) > > pcie_capability_read_word(pdev, PCI_EXP_LNKSTA, &lnk_status); > ctrl_dbg(ctrl, "%s: lnk_status = %x\n", __func__, lnk_status); > - if ((lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT) || > + if (((lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_LT) && > + !(lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_DLLLA)) || > !(lnk_status & PCI_EXP_LNKSTA_NLW)) { > ctrl_err(ctrl, "link training error: status %#06x\n", > lnk_status); > -- > 2.25.1 >
| |