Re: [PATCH 0/4] PCI: endpoint: Doorbell-related fixes

[Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 12:09:10AM +0900, Koichiro Den wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a small fix-only series related to the previous (v6)
> doorbell-related series:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20260209125316.2132589-1-den@valinux.co.jp/
> 
> These patches address a few independent fixes in pci-epf-vntb,
> pci-epf-test and pci-ep-msi:
> 
>   1/4 fixes IRQ unwind in MSI doorbell setup (pci-epf-vntb)
>   2/4 adds a bounds check for doorbell BAR offset (pci-epf-test)
>   3/4 avoids free_irq() if doorbell IRQ was not successfully requested
>       (pci-epf-test)
>   4/4 fixes error unwind and prevent double allocation in
>       pci_epf_alloc_doorbell() (pci-ep-msi)
> 
> These fixes were originally intended to be included in the next revision
> of the main series. However, doing so would have grown the v7 series to
> around 15 patches, so I am posting them separately to keep the feature
> series manageable.

I think it is a good idea to split out the doorbell fixes to its own series.

However, when splitting things out, it is getting a bit hard to track the
most "up to date" thing to look at.

At least for me, it would be nice if you could create a patchwork account
and then go in to:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-pci/list/?submitter=216987

And mark your older series (that now has a newer version) as "Superseded".

You've been doing a lot of nice work lately, but it seems like the PCI
maintainers patchwork queue/backlog is quite large right now (7 long pages
in patchwork).


I think the chances are higher that your work will get picked up if you mark
your old series as "Superseeded", because it keeps the PCI maintainers queue/
backlog smaller. (So less chance that something will be overlooked/missed.)

(I do this myself too, because it seems to make things more likely to get
picked up.)


Kind regards,
Niklas