From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz [195.113.20.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12EC0384 for ; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 01:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.113.20.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711847049; cv=none; b=dvwsp21CrDbrVssBj/GuP1TaEI+m8K0xpMeD2xqjCZrrnW2NYXrXYgZpqY6PURyERA3A0sAFYjJ9ZYI+9HZRLl4lVNzPMXS9CKW8HGjLgyW5ggpIeDR9eFvfMbvlFRBBopR/AKwJDNjwwbVPZxzf/3i1o5aRYDxXkHtl3FEbUH4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711847049; c=relaxed/simple; bh=moxV8NLD4oFvjfXW/coD+y0iRjEP4+zMCKBX+Ymsun4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=VRm4/MOK8RmQA++LLQoFYXbKhVnnhlgn+9BaXySEiMXoCajlWv3I3VtyTF9Cv1yjXEKlAxTX/jqfHuVni74hS7YsdZU2GDFVNDV2PRsxpB/stUXtnGac4VM0aMh3WDpw5+F158gKq1Ln+4S6SWYlfB/KlEW3f8XAQczXOh8IC30= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ucw.cz; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ucw.cz header.i=@ucw.cz header.b=Uj7DTHHZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.113.20.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ucw.cz Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ucw.cz header.i=@ucw.cz header.b="Uj7DTHHZ" Received: by nikam.ms.mff.cuni.cz (Postfix, from userid 2587) id D5668285EF7; Sun, 31 Mar 2024 03:03:57 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ucw.cz; s=gen1; t=1711847037; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=RsKNcBh3VGWNGZjbyNBK4t+Lo1NnHzTo5HDtN2e4BW4=; b=Uj7DTHHZyL4nFA8406lXNb7eR/JfIcfp2BKsU/a/yZOOreTpwbeTlnN4lARG70yYpLbk3a GVx9SJ1sZaehawCt4695Y+b8qRb/omIxBmK5+ODtpiBLY7uSVQS7f0R54elqGfeLIRb29Z vXOgCfcHqM4Z/5xpZP5rrJUcEqp50xc= Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2024 03:03:57 +0200 From: Martin =?utf-8?B?TWFyZcWh?= To: Dan Williams Cc: "Kobayashi,Daisuke" , linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, y-goto@fujitsu.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] Add function to display cxl1.1 device link status Message-ID: References: <20240312080559.14904-1-kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com> <20240312080559.14904-4-kobayashi.da-06@fujitsu.com> <660767abc418d_19e0294c7@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <660767abc418d_19e0294c7@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> Hello! > > Does it make sense to look up CXL RCD information for all PCIe devices of type > > PCI_EXP_TYPE_ROOT_INT_EP? Shouldn't it be done only for devices with the CXL > > capability? > > I think so, would this fit more naturally in pci_scan_caps() with a new > scan for DVSEC caps ("PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_DVSEC" in Linux). However, isn't > the trouble that this needs a DVSEC scan for CXL to know it needs to go > back and fill in details that normally in appear in the base PCIe > capability scan? I would prefer to display all CXL stuff together (i.e., when showing the DVSEC caps). Is there any reason not to? Martin