linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: x1e80100: Make the PCIe 6a PHY support 4 lanes mode

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <402aa998-8b3c-4c3c-8dcb-f128b6ddac46@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 14:38:40 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Rajendra Nayak
 <quic_rjendra@...cinc.com>, Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: qcom: x1e80100: Make the PCIe 6a PHY
 support 4 lanes mode



On 6/4/24 14:20, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2024 at 02:00:10PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 6/3/24 14:52, Johan Hovold wrote:
> 
>>> As I just mentioned in my reply on the PHY patch, this does not seem to
>>> work on the CRD were the link still come up as 2-lane (also with the
>>> clocks fixed):
>>>
>>> 	qcom-pcie 1bf8000.pci: PCIe Gen.4 x2 link up
>>>
>>> So something appears to be wrong here or in the PHY changes.
>>
>> Is the device on the other end x4-capable? Or does it not matter in
>> this log line?
> 
> Yes, of course. It's the CRD as I wrote above, and you can tell from
> other log entries:
> 
> 	pci 0007:01:00.0: 31.506 Gb/s available PCIe bandwidth, limited by 16.0 GT/s PCIe x2 link at 0007:00:00.0 (capable of 63.012 Gb/s with 16.0 GT/s PCIe x4 link)
> 
> lspci and what Windows reports.
Ok, good. I was scared of double-sourcing of parts that are not identical
in spec..

[1] suggests this wasn't ever achieved.. which makes the cover letter of
this series a bit misleading..

What does the TCSR check return? If 0, can you hardcode it to 1 and see if
the link comes up at x4?

Konrad

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Zl8H0KOrfuF91kpZ@linaro.org/