From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4ECD0E77180 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:56:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To: From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:References:List-Owner; bh=PKMblpekXA2/hGfCpbjtaPM5MzOmH6j2ryfy7333GJg=; b=2vD/C/PQ0IvQffXHygd6P+xiD5 j4kwzKW1y/99yhki76kJdb6DgWrIxYiD3HW3/h9m50YLh5O8KjXZBCKceHfntt5jf1kQ2L3VDl9c/ NrW6Z/8KS9tfo/SrGv6iK6wPN79iOkq6fEgNepjhSDQ5lfwFs8AkDGplYNGV3Johlzx0u4sWPGYrf rOL2/wZxVhb+Zt9mze4NX18dyJU7IMc+kHXNXYm3ogFExYbUOcaSCjBaC6YhwT8RPxjeBh7mPgbFZ MyxBolsUscaQCPORytHsoTBKUZnwk2fWedeq+VYlja/kU9HUg8AzVV49Z+Jtg4pdcQRF9cKvJD9CS 9c8QnRhQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tL1ex-0000000Bs8A-48Do; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:56:23 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([139.178.84.217]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tL1cJ-0000000BrdG-16J6 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:53:40 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A585C5C75; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:52:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 42100C4CEDE; Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:53:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1733842417; bh=M1OlLv3huZuTXdO1fN0ecGWpyL1LcINSI7uaJNiaGqA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=SnbDumCF+nY6G1t9JZYJGybikUE9s1a9pH6fu2eV6fK1sh7sNiOlrYSBUJB55H8YW kHls2Vmz87wOk3JNwa7psyNgUQDf48q6PTzPumIIw+ETwgWWKC/BzXkdpygE8v7Mrk PnCeTNWQ+/WRW0dbHb64nAEzO+K24XNYnhpYxd5HCnS+8ZKVLwZnNKIX5FRYGnbHik nk/s7+sighiYHlt0TCtZc1JQBrFuDKypLSTbumLbYRmEYJ4w5rXwqpxR7P0O9YcfWc HXAUOEJcydEMvPJWgOTSQ2aNA8EXshMXMnp0cmvyWSyQyXuvkpNvHBAcYmL6V1fooB svC08zE9wNyjg== Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 08:53:35 -0600 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Shuai Xue Cc: Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Ilkka Koskinen , Krishna chaitanya chundru , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/dwc_pcie: Qualify RAS DES VSEC Capability by Vendor, Revision Message-ID: <20241210145335.GA3239578@bhelgaas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <5a1ef0d2-be24-4865-8e23-159d001ac6d6@linux.alibaba.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20241210_065339_392455_1F6A7C5C X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.70 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 08:04:17PM +0800, Shuai Xue wrote: > 在 2024/12/10 06:29, Bjorn Helgaas 写道: > > From: Bjorn Helgaas > > > > PCI Vendor-Specific (VSEC) Capabilities are defined by each vendor. > > Devices from different vendors may advertise a VSEC Capability with the DWC > > RAS DES functionality, but the vendors may assign different VSEC IDs. > > > > Search for the DWC RAS DES Capability using the VSEC ID and VSEC Rev > > chosen by the vendor. > > - for (vid = dwc_pcie_vendor_ids; vid->vendor_id; vid++) { > > + for (vid = dwc_pcie_pmu_vsec_ids; vid->vendor_id; vid++) { > > How about checking the pdev->vendor with vid->vendor_id before > search the vesc cap? > > + if (pdev->vendor != vid->vendor_id) > + continue; Every user of VSEC needs to specify the (Vendor ID, VSEC ID) and verify that the Vendor ID matches the device Vendor ID, so pci_find_vsec_capability() does this check internally, so I don't think we need to do it here. > > vsec = pci_find_vsec_capability(pdev, vid->vendor_id, > > - DWC_PCIE_VSEC_RAS_DES_ID); > > - if (vsec) > > - break; > > + vid->vsec_id);