On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 01:41:10AM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2023, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> 
> > >  This is v9 of the change to work around a PCIe link training phenomenon 
> > > where a pair of devices both capable of operating at a link speed above 
> > > 2.5GT/s seems unable to negotiate the link speed and continues training 
> > > indefinitely with the Link Training bit switching on and off repeatedly 
> > > and the data link layer never reaching the active state.
> > > 
> > >  With several requests addressed and a few extra issues spotted this
> > > version has now grown to 14 patches.  It has been verified for device 
> > > enumeration with and without PCI_QUIRKS enabled, using the same piece of 
> > > RISC-V hardware as previously.  Hot plug or reset events have not been 
> > > verified, as this is difficult if at all feasible with hardware in 
> > > question.

> >  static int pci_dev_wait(struct pci_dev *dev, char *reset_type, int timeout)
> >  {
> > -	bool retrain = true;
> >  	int delay = 1;
> > +	bool retrain = false;
> > +	struct pci_dev *bridge;
> > +
> > +	if (pci_is_pcie(dev)) {
> > +		retrain = true;
> > +		bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
> > +	}
> 
>  If doing it this way, which I actually like, I think it would be a little 
> bit better performance- and style-wise if this was written as:
> 
> 	if (pci_is_pcie(dev)) {
> 		bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
> 		retrain = !!bridge;
> 	}
> 
> (or "retrain = bridge != NULL" if you prefer this style), and then we 
> don't have to repeatedly check two variables iff (pcie && !bridge) in the 
> loop below:

Done, thanks, I do like that better.  I did:

  bridge = pci_upstream_bridge(dev);
  if (bridge)
    retrain = true;

because it seems like it flows more naturally when reading.

Bjorn