linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] phy: qcom: qmp-pcie: Add support for Gen4 4-lane mode for X1E80100

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <ZtSXNt5ZSrM2t5xK@vaman>
Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2024 22:02:54 +0530
From: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] phy: qcom: qmp-pcie: Add support for Gen4 4-lane
 mode for X1E80100

On 30-08-24, 12:01, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/08/2024 21:05, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 10:04:14 +0300, Abel Vesa wrote:
> >> On all X Elite boards currently supported upstream, the NVMe sits
> >> on the PCIe 6. Until now that has been configured in dual lane mode
> >> only. The schematics reveal that the NVMe is actually using 4 lanes.
> >> So add support for the 4-lane mode and document the compatible for it.
> >>
> >> This patchset depends on:
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240805-phy-qcom-qmp-pcie-write-all-tbls-second-port-v3-1-6967c6bf61d1@linaro.org/
> >>
> >> [...]
> > 
> > Applied, thanks!
> > 
> > [1/2] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,sc8280xp-qmp-pcie-phy: Document the X1E80100 QMP PCIe PHY Gen4 x4
> >       commit: 0c5f4d23f77631f657b60ef660676303f7620688
> 
> Heh, we discussed yesterday on IRC that this should wait.

I must have miseed that...
 
> Why do we keep discussing things in private...

This ideally should have followed up as a reply to this thread...

-- 
~Vinod