All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	ide <linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>,
	bzolnier@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IDE: fix PCI must_checks
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 22:05:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4615D532.1070704@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070405142001.6610749a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2007 21:16:09 +0100
> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
> 
>>> pci_set_mwi() is an advisory thing, and on certain platforms it might fail
>>> to set the cacheline size to the desired number.  This is not a fatal error
>>> and the driver can successfully run at a lesser performance level.
>> Correct.
>>
>>> If that description is accurate then I'd contend that pci_set_mwi() is
>>> misdesigned.  It should not be returning a negative error code for
>>> something which is not an error.
>> It is an error to *some* drivers but not all. Kind of like setting some
>> of the other features may be essential for some chips and not others.
>>
>>> And we *need* to be excessively anal in the PCI setup code.  We have metric
>>> shitloads of bugs due to problems in that area, and the more formality and
>>> error handling and error reporting we can get in there the better off we
>>> will be.
>> No argument there
>>
>> If we want to deal with some of the mess we should also remove all direct
>> writing of PCI latency timers and replace them with a function to stop
>> drivers setting unsafe values and ignoring chip errata the core knows
>> about but they dont
> 
> hm. Well, what to do?
> 
> How about we prevail upon Randy to:
> 
> - rename pci_set_mwi() to pci_try_set_mwi()
> 
> - make it return 0 on success, 1 if the "try" failed
> 
> - make it return -EFOO on error (presently unimplemented)
> 
> - review callers
> 
> - remove __must_check
> 
> ?

That's fine with me.  Any comments on that, Alan?

I'm not sure that I like the proposed return values of
pci_try_set_mwi(), but I'm easy.

> I have a feeling that this is "still wrong": even things like
> pci_read_config_foo() can get errors, and there are various PCI-bus error
> handling proposals floating about which might require that callers be more
> careful in what they accept.


-- 
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***

  reply	other threads:[~2007-04-06  5:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-05  4:37 [PATCH] IDE: fix PCI must_checks Randy Dunlap
2007-04-05 11:13 ` Alan Cox
2007-04-05 20:03   ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-05 20:16     ` Alan Cox
2007-04-05 21:20       ` Andrew Morton
2007-04-06  5:05         ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
2007-04-06 17:41           ` Alan Cox
2007-04-16 17:19         ` [RFC/PATCH -mm] add pci_try_set_mwi Randy Dunlap
2007-04-16 17:21         ` Randy Dunlap

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=4615D532.1070704@oracle.com \
    --to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=bzolnier@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-ide@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.