From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
To: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org
Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com, ben.widawsky@intel.com,
ira.weiny@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com,
alison.schofield@intel.com, a.manzanares@samsung.com,
dave@stgolabs.net
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/4] cxl/mbox: Robustify handling of mbox_cmd.return_code
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2022 19:12:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220404021216.66841-1-dave@stgolabs.net> (raw)
Hi,
Changes from v1 (https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220317234049.69323-1-dave@stgolabs.net/):
- Patch 1 now just removes the lock comment, instead of moving it. (Dan)
- Modified pach 3 to use CPP hackery + misc table improvements. (Dan and Adam)
- Dropped patch 5 per concerns about implications with FW. (Dan)
- Picked up Adam's review tags.
Currently the return_code from a completed mbox command is handled as
either successful or not. This series teaches the driver to better deal
with the different returns from the hardware, allowing better debugging
and mapping to proper kernel errno semantics (which are left unchanged
for now) as well as more ad-hoc handling.
Applies against linux-cxl's next branch.
Patches 1 and 2 are small nits.
Patch 3 and 4 implement and use the new calls.
Thanks!
Davidlohr Bueso (4):
cxl/mbox: Drop mbox_mutex comment
cxl/pci: Use CXL_MBOX_SUCCESS to check against mbox_cmd return code
cxl/mbox: Improve handling of mbox_cmd hw return codes
cxl/mbox: Use new return_code handling
drivers/cxl/core/mbox.c | 7 +++---
drivers/cxl/cxlmem.h | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
drivers/cxl/pci.c | 7 +++---
3 files changed, 59 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--
2.26.2
next reply other threads:[~2022-04-04 2:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-04 2:12 Davidlohr Bueso [this message]
2022-04-04 2:12 ` [PATCH 1/4] cxl/mbox: Drop mbox_mutex comment Davidlohr Bueso
2022-04-04 2:12 ` [PATCH 2/4] cxl/pci: Use CXL_MBOX_SUCCESS to check against mbox_cmd return code Davidlohr Bueso
2022-04-04 2:12 ` [PATCH 3/4] cxl/mbox: Improve handling of mbox_cmd hw return codes Davidlohr Bueso
2022-04-04 2:12 ` [PATCH 4/4] cxl/mbox: Use new return_code handling Davidlohr Bueso
2022-04-04 3:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] cxl/mbox: Robustify handling of mbox_cmd.return_code Dan Williams
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=20220404021216.66841-1-dave@stgolabs.net \
--to=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=a.manzanares@samsung.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox