[RFC PATCH 1/1] pci-imx6: add speed change timeout message

[Troy Kisky]

On 5/21/2015 4:31 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Friday, May 22, 2015 at 01:17:41 AM, Troy Kisky wrote:
>> On 5/21/2015 2:19 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 21, 2015 at 08:35:45 PM, Troy Kisky wrote:
>>>> Currently, the timeout is never detected as count
>>>> has a value of -1 if a timeout happens, but the code is checking
>>>> for 0.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky at boundarydevices.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> This patch breaks pcie for imx6sx as my board always times out.
>>>> So, if someone could check this on an imx6sx I'd appreciate it.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Troy Kisky <troy.kisky at boundarydevices.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>  drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
>>>>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
>>>> index fdb9536..51be92c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
>>>> @@ -398,20 +398,22 @@ static int imx6_pcie_start_link(struct pcie_port
>>>> *pp)
>>>>
>>>>  	writel(tmp, pp->dbi_base + PCIE_LINK_WIDTH_SPEED_CONTROL);
>>>>  	
>>>>  	count = 200;
>>>>
>>>> -	while (count--) {
>>>
>>> Uh, wouldn't "while (--count)" fix this as well, with a smaller patch?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Marek Vasut
>>
>> Yes, but you'd have an unnecessary usleep_range (no check for finished
>> after it) if a timeout happens.
> 
> Oki, then I'll wait for Fabio to ACK this and that'd be it :)
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Best regards,
> Marek Vasut
> 

This patch breaks my imx6sx board, so it shouldn't be applied until there is
an explanation and work around of some sort.

Thanks
Troy