On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:34:15 +0100,
Bjorn Helgaas [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 06:23:00PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:06:01 +0100,
Bjorn Helgaas [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 12:18:03PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:

quoted

Geert reports that some drivers do rely on the device driver_data
field containing a pointer to the bridge structure at the point of
initialising the root port, while this has been recently changed to
contain some other data for the benefit of the Apple PCIe driver.

This small series builds on top of Geert previously posted (and
included as a prefix for reference) fix for the Microchip driver,
which breaks the Apple driver. This is basically swapping a regression
for another, which isn't a massive deal at this stage, as the
follow-up patch fixes things for the Apple driver by adding extra
tracking.

Is there a bisection hole between patches 1 and 2?

  1: PCI: host-generic: Set driver_data before calling gen_pci_init()
  2: PCI: apple: Add tracking of probed root ports

If so, would it be practical to avoid the hole by reordering those
patches?

Sure, but you said you already had queued patch #1, and what is in
-rc1 already breaks Geert's box. So no matter the order, we break
something at some point.

I did, but when I saw your problem report and subsequent updates, I
put Geert's patch on hold.

quoted

If you want to only break one thing, then yes, swapping these two
patches is the correct thing to do.

I swapped them and put them back on pci/for-linus for v6.16:

  https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/pci/pci.git/log/?h=for-linus&id=ba74278c638d

LGTM, thanks for picking these up!

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.