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 66422C43458 for ; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 07:35:08 +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:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=8RLhhGW3sN2X1G7MiWX/+WzP7e7Dm5U8Ht8FceQ5jrM=; b=i6fpPX/Bd/6IoSXpq8RP9llV2J DfIqqCjYKsT6+yb79NWKg+iB/3dWrp8wih5djEBIfAGMPVODz+GB7JVtoiJrlJi9Gld0wtGEK1HUi fPqCUoZnn7R28r73QvVZxrzREFMXPP29NBXnKNtanujuc+a1t3nAB6sXfCq1LCVsq5/TRAoMEiV19 tpIPxWTr9C4mr0WC82cw/tuE/ITXHsD6SN8mRuR2YX/F/+lmCZYtEWfFVB7bCx2uFwTWsv5WmFk9i sEzvFO53JTETpdnNwPHqHr5VJ7J3WPWl6IhNvunMw08lZ9Zj6C3O+7rwBeEncA1tmyi3B41RxXMaU yVzulQYQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1whjHh-00000001JHD-2FU2; Thu, 09 Jul 2026 07:35:01 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1whjHe-00000001JG8-0C8Q for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 09 Jul 2026 07:35:00 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92EF715A1; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.41.150.148] (e142021.arm.com [10.41.150.148]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9A8363F66F; Thu, 9 Jul 2026 00:34:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1783582496; bh=66zG2d9zsYOd+DElbNs9ua75fdJfZCXLCzoMIQb2+JQ=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=d1pTRXZ6UVsx1u0U2+SyDD2mwhSrCjkE9GB6a3oOdcneINwF0C7nGmUVCMs8YTDAL 0iMMDOoK9gbB0vSgR+3aXn+LC/CEFfJI/Cnrww1hnT8vMprDaAL9BLgJvk0Im9l8o7 ZQdGhk1QFxEKunC9W1uf9CK9wDfuV/WOSYySn1TM= Message-ID: <4d1f25a3-d1a3-4521-ae49-d41fd1367a58@arm.com> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2026 09:34:50 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/15] arm_mpam: propagate MSC read errors for wrapper functions To: Ben Horgan , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Hanjun Guo , Sudeep Holla , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Len Brown , James Morse , Reinette Chatre , Fenghua Yu Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Srivathsa L Rao , Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Trilok Soni , Srinivas Ramana , Niyas Sait , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260702162229.4008659-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20260702162229.4008659-3-andre.przywara@arm.com> <029910c3-e90f-4a35-8b01-4d3ff548deea@arm.com> Content-Language: en-GB From: Andre Przywara In-Reply-To: <029910c3-e90f-4a35-8b01-4d3ff548deea@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260709_003458_260056_F7702D42 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.31 ) 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 Hi, On 7/1/26 21:56, Ben Horgan wrote: > Hi Andre, > > On 7/2/26 17:22, Andre Przywara wrote: >> Allow the wrapper functions for IDR and ESR accesses to return an >> error, and propagate read errors from the lower level up. >> >> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara >> --- >> drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> index df14b4513382..ce8738adb6ff 100644 >> --- a/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> +++ b/drivers/resctrl/mpam_devices.c >> @@ -247,27 +247,34 @@ static bool mpam_msc_check_aidr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> return true; >> } >> >> -static u64 mpam_msc_read_idr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> +static int mpam_msc_read_idr(struct mpam_msc *msc, u64 *res) >> { >> u32 idr_high = 0, idr_low; >> + int ret; >> >> lockdep_assert_held(&msc->part_sel_lock); >> >> - mpam_read_partsel_reg(msc, IDR, &idr_low); >> - if (FIELD_GET(MPAMF_IDR_EXT, idr_low)) >> - mpam_read_partsel_reg(msc, IDR + 4, &idr_high); >> + ret = mpam_read_partsel_reg(msc, IDR, &idr_low); >> + if (!ret && FIELD_GET(MPAMF_IDR_EXT, idr_low)) >> + ret = mpam_read_partsel_reg(msc, IDR + 4, &idr_high); >> >> - return ((u64)idr_high << 32) | idr_low; >> + if (!ret) >> + *res = ((u64)idr_high << 32) | idr_low; >> + >> + return ret; >> } > > Why does the pattern here, use of !ret rather than early return, differ > from the one you've used in mpam_msc_read_esr()? No particular reason, I think I switched patterns, for instance depending on whether a lock was held or not, or when there are some side effect of that function, so probably just repeated the last exercise. I changed it to return early here. Cheers, Andre > >> >> -static void mpam_msc_clear_esr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> +static int mpam_msc_clear_esr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> { >> u32 esr_low; >> + int ret; >> >> - __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR, &esr_low); >> + ret = __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR, &esr_low); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> >> if (!esr_low) >> - return; >> + return 0; >> >> /* >> * Clearing the high/low bits of MPAMF_ESR can not be atomic. >> @@ -277,18 +284,30 @@ static void mpam_msc_clear_esr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> */ >> if (msc->has_extd_esr) >> __mpam_write_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR + 4, 0); >> + >> __mpam_write_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR, 0); >> + >> + return 0; >> } >> >> -static u64 mpam_msc_read_esr(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> +static int mpam_msc_read_esr(struct mpam_msc *msc, u64 *res) >> { >> u32 esr_high = 0, esr_low; >> + int ret; >> >> - __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR, &esr_low); >> - if (msc->has_extd_esr) >> - __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR + 4, &esr_high); >> + ret = __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR, &esr_low); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + >> + if (msc->has_extd_esr) { >> + ret = __mpam_read_reg(msc, MPAMF_ESR + 4, &esr_high); >> + if (ret) >> + return ret; >> + } >> >> - return ((u64)esr_high << 32) | esr_low; >> + *res = ((u64)esr_high << 32) | esr_low; >> + >> + return 0; >> } >> >> static void __mpam_part_sel_raw(u32 partsel, struct mpam_msc *msc) >> @@ -993,7 +1012,7 @@ static int mpam_msc_hw_probe(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> >> /* Grab an IDR value to find out how many RIS there are */ >> mutex_lock(&msc->part_sel_lock); >> - idr = mpam_msc_read_idr(msc); >> + mpam_msc_read_idr(msc, &idr); >> mpam_read_partsel_reg(msc, IIDR, &msc->iidr); >> >> mutex_unlock(&msc->part_sel_lock); >> @@ -1009,7 +1028,7 @@ static int mpam_msc_hw_probe(struct mpam_msc *msc) >> for (ris_idx = 0; ris_idx <= msc->ris_max; ris_idx++) { >> mutex_lock(&msc->part_sel_lock); >> __mpam_part_sel(ris_idx, 0, msc); >> - idr = mpam_msc_read_idr(msc); >> + mpam_msc_read_idr(msc, &idr); >> mutex_unlock(&msc->part_sel_lock); >> >> partid_max = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_IDR_PARTID_MAX, idr); >> @@ -2492,7 +2511,7 @@ static irqreturn_t __mpam_irq_handler(int irq, struct mpam_msc *msc) >> &msc->accessibility))) >> return IRQ_NONE; >> >> - reg = mpam_msc_read_esr(msc); >> + mpam_msc_read_esr(msc, ®); >> >> errcode = FIELD_GET(MPAMF_ESR_ERRCODE, reg); >> if (!errcode) >