From: "Li, Ming" <ming4.li@intel.com>
To: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
"Bjorn Helgaas" <helgaas@kernel.org>, <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>,
Ben Widawsky <bwidawsk@kernel.org>, <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
<linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] cxl/pci: Use synchronous API for DOE
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2023 16:53:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c9923e59-176c-2e52-9ebf-58bb25750083@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <63cf2bc3cf76_521a294a1@iweiny-mobl.notmuch>
On 1/24/2023 8:52 AM, Ira Weiny wrote:
> Lukas Wunner wrote:
>> A synchronous API for DOE has just been introduced. Convert CXL CDAT
>> retrieval over to it.
>>
>> Tested-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
>
>> Signed-off-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
>> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>> Cc: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/cxl/core/pci.c | 62 ++++++++++++++----------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-)
>>
......
>> static int cxl_cdat_get_length(struct device *dev,
>> struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe,
>> size_t *length)
>> {
>> - DECLARE_CDAT_DOE_TASK(CDAT_DOE_REQ(0), t);
>> + u32 request = CDAT_DOE_REQ(0);
>> + u32 response[32];
>> int rc;
>>
>> - rc = pci_doe_submit_task(cdat_doe, &t.task);
>> + rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
>> + CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS,
>> + &request, sizeof(request),
>> + &response, sizeof(response));
>> if (rc < 0) {
>> - dev_err(dev, "DOE submit failed: %d", rc);
>> + dev_err(dev, "DOE failed: %d", rc);
>> return rc;
>> }
>> - wait_for_completion(&t.c);
>> - if (t.task.rv < sizeof(u32))
>> + if (rc < sizeof(u32))
>> return -EIO;
>>
Sorry, I didn't find the original patchset email, only can reply here.
Should this "if (rc < sizeof(u32))" be "if (rc < 2 * sizeof(u32))"?
Because below code used response[1] directly, that means we need unless two u32 in response payload.
Thanks
Ming
>> - *length = t.response_pl[1];
>> + *length = response[1]>> dev_dbg(dev, "CDAT length %zu\n", *length);
>>
>> return 0;
>> @@ -546,26 +521,29 @@ static int cxl_cdat_read_table(struct device *dev,
>> int entry_handle = 0;
>>
>> do {
>> - DECLARE_CDAT_DOE_TASK(CDAT_DOE_REQ(entry_handle), t);
>> + u32 request = CDAT_DOE_REQ(entry_handle);
>> + u32 response[32];
>> size_t entry_dw;
>> u32 *entry;
>> int rc;
>>
>> - rc = pci_doe_submit_task(cdat_doe, &t.task);
>> + rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
>> + CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS,
>> + &request, sizeof(request),
>> + &response, sizeof(response));
>> if (rc < 0) {
>> - dev_err(dev, "DOE submit failed: %d", rc);
>> + dev_err(dev, "DOE failed: %d", rc);
>> return rc;
>> }
>> - wait_for_completion(&t.c);
>> /* 1 DW header + 1 DW data min */
>> - if (t.task.rv < (2 * sizeof(u32)))
>> + if (rc < (2 * sizeof(u32)))
>> return -EIO;
>>
>> /* Get the CXL table access header entry handle */
>> entry_handle = FIELD_GET(CXL_DOE_TABLE_ACCESS_ENTRY_HANDLE,
>> - t.response_pl[0]);
>> - entry = t.response_pl + 1;
>> - entry_dw = t.task.rv / sizeof(u32);
>> + response[0]);
>> + entry = response + 1;
>> + entry_dw = rc / sizeof(u32);
>> /* Skip Header */
>> entry_dw -= 1;
>> entry_dw = min(length / sizeof(u32), entry_dw);
>> --
>> 2.39.1
>>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-03 8:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-23 10:10 [PATCH v2 00/10] Collection of DOE material Lukas Wunner
2023-01-23 10:11 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] PCI/DOE: Silence WARN splat with CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS=y Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 0:33 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 10:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-25 21:05 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 16:18 ` Gregory Price
2023-02-10 23:50 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-23 10:12 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] PCI/DOE: Fix memory leak " Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 0:35 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 10:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-02-10 23:52 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-23 10:13 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] PCI/DOE: Provide synchronous API and use it internally Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 0:48 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 10:40 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-24 20:07 ` Ira Weiny
2023-02-10 23:57 ` Dan Williams
2023-01-23 10:14 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] cxl/pci: Use synchronous API for DOE Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 0:52 ` Ira Weiny
2023-02-03 8:53 ` Li, Ming [this message]
2023-02-03 8:56 ` Li, Ming
2023-02-03 9:54 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 11:01 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-02-10 22:17 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-23 10:15 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] PCI/DOE: Make asynchronous API private Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 0:55 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 11:03 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-23 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] PCI/DOE: Allow mailbox creation without devres management Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 12:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-24 12:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-02-03 9:06 ` Li, Ming
2023-02-03 9:09 ` Li, Ming
2023-02-03 10:08 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-02-10 22:03 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-23 10:17 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] PCI/DOE: Create mailboxes on device enumeration Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 1:14 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 12:21 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-23 10:18 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] cxl/pci: Use CDAT DOE mailbox created by PCI core Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 1:18 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 12:25 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-23 10:19 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] PCI/DOE: Make mailbox creation API private Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 1:25 ` Ira Weiny
2023-01-24 12:26 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-23 10:20 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] PCI/DOE: Relax restrictions on request and response size Lukas Wunner
2023-01-23 22:29 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-01-24 1:43 ` Ira Weiny
2023-02-10 21:47 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-24 12:43 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-01-24 23:51 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-01-25 9:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2023-02-10 22:10 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-01-23 22:30 ` [PATCH v2 00/10] Collection of DOE material Bjorn Helgaas
2023-02-10 21:39 ` Lukas Wunner
2023-02-11 0:04 ` 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=c9923e59-176c-2e52-9ebf-58bb25750083@intel.com \
--to=ming4.li@intel.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=bwidawsk@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=gregory.price@memverge.com \
--cc=hdanton@sina.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--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