All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, matthew@wil.cx,
	val_henson@linux.intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	gregkh@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [PCI] Check that MWI bit really did get set
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 15:45:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200610151545.59477.david-b@pacbell.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061015123432.4c6b7f15.akpm@osdl.org>

> > Most drivers should be able to say "enable MWI if possible, but
> > don't worry if it's not possible".  Only a few controllers need
> > additional setup to make MWI actually work ... if they couldn't
> > do that setup, that'd be worth a warning before they backed off
> > to run in a non-MWI mode.
> > 
> 
> So the semantics of pci_set_mwi() are "try to set MWI if this
> platform/device supports it".

Not what I said ... that's what the _driver_ usually wants to do,
which is different from the step implemented by set_mwi(). 


What Alan Cox said is a better paraphrase:

> MWI is an "extra cheese" option not a "no pizza" case

Or "sorry, that car is not available in olive, just burgundy."


Not:

> In that case its interface is misdesigned, because it doesn't discriminate
> between "yes-it-does/no-it-doesn't" (which we don't want to report, because
> either is expected and legitimate) and "something screwed up", which we do
> want to report, because it is always unexpected.

You mis-understand.  It's completely legit for the driver not to care.

I agree that set_mwo() should set MWI if possible, and fail cleanly
if it couldn't (for whatever reason).  Thing is, choosing to treat
that as an error must be the _driver's_ choice ... it'd be wrong to force
that policy into the _interface_ by forcing must_check etc.

- Dave



  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-15 22:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-06 19:05 [PATCH 1/2] [PCI] Check that MWI bit really did get set Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-06 19:05 ` [PATCH 2/2] [TULIP] Check the return value from pci_set_mwi() Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-06 19:15   ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-06 19:28     ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-06 19:59       ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-07  5:34         ` Grant Grundler
2006-10-07 14:44           ` Jeff Garzik
2006-10-06 19:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] [PCI] Check that MWI bit really did get set Jeff Garzik
2006-10-14  4:41 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-14  5:21   ` Greg KH
2006-10-14 14:02   ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-14 20:48     ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-15  3:20       ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-15  6:53         ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-15 13:54           ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-15 17:47             ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-15  7:08         ` [Bulk] " David Brownell
2006-10-15  7:08           ` David Brownell
2006-10-15 13:52           ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-15 14:21           ` Alan Cox
2006-10-15 13:57             ` Matthew Wilcox
2006-10-15 17:45               ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-15 19:16                 ` David Brownell
2006-10-15 19:34                   ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-15 22:45                     ` David Brownell [this message]
2006-10-15 23:18                       ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-16  0:02                         ` Alan Cox
2006-10-15 23:44                           ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-16  0:44                             ` Paul Mackerras
2006-10-16  1:10                               ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-16  2:07                                 ` David Brownell
2006-10-16 10:58                                 ` Alan Cox
2006-10-16 11:02                             ` Alan Cox
2006-10-16  0:16                         ` David Brownell
2006-10-16  0:31                           ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-16 10:59                           ` Alan Cox
2006-10-15 21:52                 ` [Bulk] " Alan Cox
2006-10-16  0:00                 ` Paul Mackerras
2006-10-16  0:15                   ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-16  0:21                   ` David Brownell

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=200610151545.59477.david-b@pacbell.net \
    --to=david-b@pacbell.net \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz \
    --cc=matthew@wil.cx \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=val_henson@linux.intel.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.