[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aISJ7MG3zbMRuc_Q@wunner.de>
Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2025 09:55:24 +0200
From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
To: Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Matthew W Carlis <mattc@...estorage.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com, bp@...en8.de,
davem@...emloft.net, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
naveen@...nel.org, oleg@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, tianruidong@...ux.alibaba.com,
tony.luck@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] PCI: hotplug: Add a generic RAS tracepoint for
hotplug event
On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 09:17:55PM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote:
> 2025/7/19 15:11, Lukas Wunner :
> > PCI links can be tunneled over Thunderbolt, in this case the
> > link speed is fixed to 2.5 GT/s (USB4 v1.0 sec 11.2.1), but
> > in reality is governed by the speed of the Thunderbolt fabric
> > (which can even be asymmetric). Do we want to report the
> > virtual 2.5 GT/s in this case or the actual Thunderbolt speed?
> > Or do we want a separate trace event for Thunderbolt?
>
> I'm not a user of Thunderbolt, which way do you prefer?
Keep reporting the virtual 2.5 GT/s in the PCI tracepoint and
maybe add a separate tracepoint later in the thunderbolt driver
to report the Thunderbolt speed.
Thanks,
Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists