From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30FBC15A4AF for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2024 07:09:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722928174; cv=none; b=X53Ixe8nS9zw6An+ww3h+FpjSj7jeqybjG2X3nTaHB8O62CRVYx/7Z1zoeBbdDR/UP+gPHzWsQnOLELGgkUOAyeQarXY5SRbbbX7TOx/fnMjEeoAuRFEMiDmYaa8vCOpyZswP48BKgv8ua7OEhKzgI9SSiY57JXptyn8DLSH6j0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722928174; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9O/PN2ByNNX2MAC0pEpxG3lhXMK3jbOV2GGEZLJYaNk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=gVeWa8cjE1HBqRKvm8mAKL3XPlGVBfwYgKyQmvN3dUFFjgIS4cJ0RFgfPojATrjPd0B3iocfNH5PLTnC3U0fXT6DGJOUXl0dfSB71v67WnCE7pP4kFtoKbCJ0Uq2fnOk3Hb6HXV3Oxq0DAQXayB6ozh8VsYAf2zCDpOQRbcrLkg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=FC5kddHc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="FC5kddHc" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1722928172; x=1754464172; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9O/PN2ByNNX2MAC0pEpxG3lhXMK3jbOV2GGEZLJYaNk=; b=FC5kddHci6q+4HohjKlASU+i6zkcWNj3EEW4dR6oWETlyk32ntBCzgiF TFTZDpE+1OhqDLmi3mlAHQSaNsRlHiCskf0FwsDCnnWwviCbrHjOxVlvl QMdxUbNMxA9Whei0ctlh4IeoDZXsABCs8tgWqsrIHUZ00hBYTAPMocZBZ hPdWVFx9tH5HO7SXL6yZjEOmGA/dVJJuC9g/ZMCmOtgfYVRgkCZ7KlI6S Fw2xTha2dvyDlR01V2Odzmw+kYwuwSlDHqnZ1VKc7ZLptnQFCFhMvcqP+ 18Ip3Wk/eQDsQfLnqh7vhYvX4sFT9GbRX72FFiZs5Omm06YBRzv73NTgJ A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: EcmHvR1KR1GQummcZpTJLg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: kXclmbfLRpSwHXoTFrLvBA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11155"; a="32329064" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.09,267,1716274800"; d="scan'208";a="32329064" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by fmvoesa104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Aug 2024 00:09:31 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rC06mci3SC2SGLuLnynhbg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 1NBSZX0HRkqVvBDPy9ZlLw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.09,267,1716274800"; d="scan'208";a="56300998" Received: from unknown (HELO [10.237.72.57]) ([10.237.72.57]) by orviesa010.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2024 00:09:30 -0700 Message-ID: <034b5511-e3c2-443d-8bac-8e5ed7095236@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 10:09:28 +0300 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] i3c: mipi-i3c-hci: Add a quirk to set PIO mode To: Shyam Sundar S K , Alexandre Belloni Cc: Guruvendra Punugupati , Krishnamoorthi M , linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240724071245.3833404-1-Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com> <20240724071245.3833404-3-Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com> <8ec23c64-0b55-4a71-8199-14cb6061ad45@amd.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jarkko Nikula In-Reply-To: <8ec23c64-0b55-4a71-8199-14cb6061ad45@amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 8/5/24 12:26 PM, Shyam Sundar S K wrote: > Hi, > > On 8/2/2024 19:28, Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> >> This is true, I see this now from pre-v1.0, v1.0. v1.1 and v1.2 specs >> too, HC_CONTROL_PIO_MODE bit is present only after v1.0. And therefore >> version != HCI_VERSION_V1 check is not fully correct since bit is not >> present in pre-v1.0 HW versions either. >> > > Agreed. HC_CONTROL_PIO_MODE is only present in v1.1 and v1.2. > > anything below v1.0, the version check handling is already present; > > switch (regval & ~0xf) { > case 0x100: /* version 1.0 */ > case 0x110: /* version 1.1 */ > case 0x200: /* version 2.0 */ > break; > default: > dev_err(&hci->master.dev, "unsupported HCI version\n"); > return -EPROTONOSUPPORT; > } > > Let me know your thoughts. > Yeah, true. I'd still use version > v1.0 check because that reflects the current situation. Mostly to avoid confusion when reading the code but also if someone adds support for pre-v1.0 HW (perhaps unlikely) and then doesn't need to change version check here.