lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 3/3] PCI/ACPI: Use device constraints to decide PCI target state fallback policy
On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 11:37:10PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> On 8/3/23 23:30, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 08:02:29PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:

...

> > > + pci_dbg(dev, "ACPI device constraint: %d\n", constraint);
> >
> > Does it make sense before the below check? Why can we be interested in the
> > _exact_ negative values? (Note that non-printing is already a sign that either
> > we don't call this or have negative constraint.)
>
> There are two different negative values that can come up:
> -ENODEV or -EINVAL. Both were interesting while coming up with this series
> because they mean something different about why a constraint wasn't
> selected.
>
> -ENODEV means the constraint wasn't found.
> -EINVAL means the constraint was found but something is wrong with the table
> parser or the table itself. I found the table parser wasn't working
> correctly originaly thanks to this.
>
> Maybe now that I've got it all working you're right and this should go
> after the error checking.

Or maybe moved to the acpi_get_lps0_constraint().

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-08-04 06:59    [W:0.045 / U:1.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site