On 7/14/25 8:01 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> It allows us to group all the settings that need to be done when a PCI
> device is attached to the bus in a single place.
>
> Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> index b4993642ed90915299e825e47d282b8175a78346..b364977d78a2c659f65f0f12ce4274601d20eaa6 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> @@ -1616,8 +1616,6 @@ static irqreturn_t qcom_pcie_global_irq_thread(int irq, void *data)
> pci_lock_rescan_remove();
> pci_rescan_bus(pp->bridge->bus);
> pci_unlock_rescan_remove();
> -
> - qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update(pcie);
> } else {
> dev_WARN_ONCE(dev, 1, "Received unknown event. INT_STATUS: 0x%08x\n",
> status);
> @@ -1765,6 +1763,7 @@ static int pcie_qcom_notify(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long action,
> switch (action) {
> case BUS_NOTIFY_BIND_DRIVER:
> qcom_pcie_enable_aspm(pdev);
> + qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update(pcie);
So I assume that we're not exactly going to do much with the device if
there isn't a driver for it, but I have concerns that since the link
would already be established(?), the icc vote may be too low, especially
if the user uses something funky like UIO
Konrad
