From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: aik@ozlabs.ru, Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] drivers/vfio: EEH support for VFIO PCI device
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:56:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1400709391.29150.24.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <537CA50E.9090404@suse.de>
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 15:07 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_EEH
> > +int eeh_vfio_open(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> Why vfio? Also that config option will not be set if vfio is compiled as
> a module.
>
> > +{
> > + struct eeh_dev *edev;
> > +
> > + /* No PCI device ? */
> > + if (!pdev)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + /* No EEH device ? */
> > + edev = pci_dev_to_eeh_dev(pdev);
> > + if (!edev || !edev->pe)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + eeh_dev_set_passed(edev, true);
> > + eeh_pe_set_passed(edev->pe, true);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(eeh_vfio_open);
Additionally, shouldn't we have some locking here ? (and in release too)
I don't like relying on the caller locking (if it does it at all).
> > + /* Device existing ? */
> > + ret = eeh_vfio_check_dev(pdev, &edev, &pe);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + pr_debug("%s: Cannot find device %s\n",
> > + __func__, pdev ? pci_name(pdev) : "NULL");
> > + *retval = -7;
>
> What are these? Please use proper kernel internal return values for
> errors. I don't want to see anything even remotely tied to RTAS in any
> of these patches.
Hint: -ENODEV
Cheers,
Ben.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: aik@ozlabs.ru, Gavin Shan <gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] drivers/vfio: EEH support for VFIO PCI device
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 07:56:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1400709391.29150.24.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <537CA50E.9090404@suse.de>
On Wed, 2014-05-21 at 15:07 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_EEH
> > +int eeh_vfio_open(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> Why vfio? Also that config option will not be set if vfio is compiled as
> a module.
>
> > +{
> > + struct eeh_dev *edev;
> > +
> > + /* No PCI device ? */
> > + if (!pdev)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + /* No EEH device ? */
> > + edev = pci_dev_to_eeh_dev(pdev);
> > + if (!edev || !edev->pe)
> > + return -ENODEV;
> > +
> > + eeh_dev_set_passed(edev, true);
> > + eeh_pe_set_passed(edev->pe, true);
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(eeh_vfio_open);
Additionally, shouldn't we have some locking here ? (and in release too)
I don't like relying on the caller locking (if it does it at all).
> > + /* Device existing ? */
> > + ret = eeh_vfio_check_dev(pdev, &edev, &pe);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + pr_debug("%s: Cannot find device %s\n",
> > + __func__, pdev ? pci_name(pdev) : "NULL");
> > + *retval = -7;
>
> What are these? Please use proper kernel internal return values for
> errors. I don't want to see anything even remotely tied to RTAS in any
> of these patches.
Hint: -ENODEV
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-21 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-21 5:03 [PATCH v5 0/4] EEH Support for VFIO PCI device Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] drivers/vfio: Introduce CONFIG_VFIO_PCI_EEH Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] powerpc/eeh: Flags for passed device and PE Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] drivers/vfio: EEH support for VFIO PCI device Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 13:07 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 13:07 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 21:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2014-05-21 21:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-05-22 8:11 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-22 8:11 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 23:48 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 23:48 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] powerpc/eeh: Avoid event on passed PE Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 5:03 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-21 13:13 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-21 13:13 ` Alexander Graf
2014-05-22 0:01 ` Gavin Shan
2014-05-22 0:01 ` Gavin Shan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1400709391.29150.24.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=qiudayu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.