From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (relay4-d.mail.gandi.net [217.70.183.196]) (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 6ED921CD00; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:06:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.196 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710331585; cv=none; b=jd5r37EfDN1HFRZMl3YzgLlVyzrZtPeNAEztWBMfx/erPVkNzkKvnIfBuk0AoakRF/JEqS7Qz6Pus/3J95HbnN9IajIwEzqxFNNraGLDx/qNBSH96Nwr+i9Hr0eV3nwdyKMfYe/H8Wh0NYbmolHO1+oqNhx5zR1LQIVWz17V4qQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710331585; c=relaxed/simple; bh=G33yJ0hd6fYJ103h6Wuuwm4C6XCXponRb0+ARfXFBJA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=fex3ZmmLXZyaKS3IMSh2V9fMR2XFb3r7UOcjDgNKaYzEtueGk4WeYGdsnuIM0pMSGSC/HhDqzOAAFbYhilDgQVe4aOQv7x3aybxYgaJ21tde5Pnp8xGRgbra6gGvqJse7Y6p7qb0bZeDiA0boYNAjwM0f2DFP3zdt1UQaJ+PogY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arinc9.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arinc9.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arinc9.com header.i=@arinc9.com header.b=E/IpBBLu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.183.196 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arinc9.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arinc9.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=arinc9.com header.i=@arinc9.com header.b="E/IpBBLu" Received: by mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07BCDE000D; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 12:06:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=arinc9.com; s=gm1; t=1710331580; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9En6uzyrXqEpXMyli+a5bbxKTYmfpSeoH7e6bqHXIiQ=; b=E/IpBBLuJBUaF1nTLhkj0clPsXeXOXtqG75qHpr/AVJ1aTjlVT21OMhyXGkpR+bpiWuG0j dUjfrM6hzo4yaJgWljTIc3wqJz+rCFpDqcHZskzh7aP2wtcQezWwjX79pzhZR7eTrY3b9j +fApCe8Na+0M6PeDYARhae3X7kNi7BMTvLDZUQeG6KkJiFQ2b9LAMH4s4x/D1+keTLLvhn CWC8DZ+/4XERrEe0jJFN0+RSbX9wwyKgXE6Nf694GNk4xkK3vJ40ChxPy4RDeCIyJoVdkv cYoNvo+hWM25HLfFHCO/L++ZcWLunYW1aWYbPMZjVcNjLDT6F9JsKktOuNl1OA== Message-ID: <2640a495-97a0-4669-a53a-e367af956a78@arinc9.com> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:06:04 +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] net: dsa: mt7530: increase reset hold time To: Justin Swartz Cc: Daniel Golle , DENG Qingfang , Sean Wang , Andrew Lunn , Florian Fainelli , Vladimir Oltean , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org References: <20240312192117.7789-1-justin.swartz@risingedge.co.za> Content-Language: en-US From: =?UTF-8?B?QXLEsW7DpyDDnE5BTA==?= In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Flag: yes X-Spam-Level: ************************** X-GND-Spam-Score: 400 X-GND-Status: SPAM X-GND-Sasl: arinc.unal@arinc9.com On 13.03.2024 14:52, Justin Swartz wrote: > > On 2024-03-13 10:59, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: >> This ship has sailed anyway. Now the changes the first patch did must be >> reverted too. I will deal with this from now on, you can stop sending >> patches regarding this. > > At least if the first patch isn't reverted, the approach used is > less likely to result in the problem occuring, IMHO. I disagree that the previous approach is less likely to result in the problem occurring. If you don't like the delay amount we agreed on, feel free to express a higher amount. I also disagree on introducing a solution that is in addition to another solution, both of which fix the same problem. > > The delay between deliberately switching the LEDs off, instead of > only waiting on chip reset logic to handle that, and the reset > assertion could be considered a "reset setup" period to complement > the original reset hold period. > > Increasing the hold period to what should be 5000 - 5100 usec, > definitely made the problem go away my testing, but the previous > approach is (if nothing else) more explicit in its intent. I don't want any unnecessary complications on the code I'm maintaining. I already gave a clear intent on the patch log that introduces a simpler and more efficient approach, it doesn't need to be on the code. Arınç