lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 00/11] PCI: Drop duplicated tracking of a pci_dev's bound driver
    On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 2:33 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> wrote:
    > On Mon, Oct 04, 2021 at 02:59:24PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:

    > I split some of the bigger patches apart so they only touched one
    > driver or subsystem at a time. I also updated to_pci_driver() so it
    > returns NULL when given NULL, which makes some of the validations
    > quite a bit simpler, especially in the PM code in pci-driver.c.

    It's a bit unusual. Other to_*_dev() are not NULL-aware IIRC.

    Below are some comments as well.

    ...

    > static bool match_id(struct pci_dev *pdev, unsigned short vendor, unsigned short device)
    > {
    > + struct pci_driver *drv = to_pci_driver(pdev->dev.driver);
    > const struct pci_device_id *id;
    >
    > if (pdev->vendor == vendor && pdev->device == device)
    > return true;

    > + for (id = drv ? drv->id_table : NULL; id && id->vendor; id++)
    > + if (id->vendor == vendor && id->device == device)

    > + break;

    return true;

    > return id && id->vendor;

    return false;

    > }

    ...

    > + afu_result = err_handler->error_detected(afu_dev,
    > + state);

    One line?

    ...

    > device_lock(&vf_dev->dev);
    > - if (vf_dev->dev.driver) {
    > + if (to_pci_driver(vf_dev->dev.driver)) {

    Hmm...

    ...

    > + if (!pci_dev->state_saved && pci_dev->current_state != PCI_D0

    > + && pci_dev->current_state != PCI_UNKNOWN) {

    Can we keep && on the previous line?

    > + pci_WARN_ONCE(pci_dev, pci_dev->current_state != prev,
    > + "PCI PM: Device state not saved by %pS\n",
    > + drv->suspend);
    > }

    ...

    > + return drv && drv->resume ?
    > + drv->resume(pci_dev) : pci_pm_reenable_device(pci_dev);

    One line?

    ...

    > + struct pci_driver *drv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver);
    > const struct pci_error_handlers *err_handler =
    > - dev->dev.driver ? to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver)->err_handler : NULL;
    > + drv ? drv->err_handler : NULL;

    Isn't dev->driver == to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver)?

    ...

    > + struct pci_driver *drv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver);
    > const struct pci_error_handlers *err_handler =
    > - dev->dev.driver ? to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver)->err_handler : NULL;
    > + drv ? drv->err_handler : NULL;

    Ditto.

    ...

    > device_lock(&dev->dev);
    > + pdrv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver);
    > if (!pci_dev_set_io_state(dev, state) ||
    > - !dev->dev.driver ||
    > - !(pdrv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver))->err_handler ||

    > + !pdrv ||
    > + !pdrv->err_handler ||

    One line now?

    > !pdrv->err_handler->error_detected) {

    Or this and the previous line?

    ...

    > + pdrv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver);
    > + if (!pdrv ||
    > + !pdrv->err_handler ||
    > !pdrv->err_handler->mmio_enabled)
    > goto out;

    Ditto.

    ...

    > + pdrv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver);
    > + if (!pdrv ||
    > + !pdrv->err_handler ||
    > !pdrv->err_handler->slot_reset)
    > goto out;

    Ditto.

    ...

    > if (!pci_dev_set_io_state(dev, pci_channel_io_normal) ||
    > - !dev->dev.driver ||
    > - !(pdrv = to_pci_driver(dev->dev.driver))->err_handler ||
    > + !pdrv ||
    > + !pdrv->err_handler ||
    > !pdrv->err_handler->resume)
    > goto out;

    Ditto.

    > - result = PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE;
    >
    > pcidev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(domain, bus, devfn);
    > if (!pcidev || !pcidev->dev.driver) {
    > dev_err(&pdev->xdev->dev, "device or AER driver is NULL\n");
    > pci_dev_put(pcidev);
    > - return result;
    > + return PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE;
    > }
    > pdrv = to_pci_driver(pcidev->dev.driver);

    What about splitting the conditional to two with clear error message
    in each and use pci_err() in the second one?

    ...

    > default:
    > dev_err(&pdev->xdev->dev,
    > - "bad request in aer recovery "
    > - "operation!\n");
    > + "bad request in AER recovery operation!\n");

    Stray change? Or is it in a separate patch in your tree?

    --
    With Best Regards,
    Andy Shevchenko

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-10-13 11:29    [W:2.701 / U:0.112 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site