From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:43722 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2387580AbeKFHEY (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2018 02:04:24 -0500 Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 22:42:33 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Woods, Brian" Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "x86@kernel.org" , Clemens Ladisch , Jean Delvare , Guenter Roeck , Bjorn Helgaas , Pu Wen , Jia Zhang , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/amd_nb: add support for newer PCI topologies Message-ID: <20181105214233.GF26868@zn.tnic> References: <20181102181055.130531-1-brian.woods@amd.com> <20181102181055.130531-3-brian.woods@amd.com> <20181105193840.GA26868@zn.tnic> <20181105203330.GB27399@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181105203330.GB27399@amd.com> Sender: linux-hwmon-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:33:34PM +0000, Woods, Brian wrote: > I think having them togeter is cleaner. If you aren't finding any > misc IDs, I highly doubt you'll find any root IDs. There shouldn't > be much of a difference in how fast the function exits, either way. > If you want it the other way though, I don't mind changing it. Yes please. Because this is the usual kernel coding style of calling a function (or a loop which has some result in this case) and testing that result immediately after the function call. > Would > > /* > * If there are more PCI root devices than data fabric/ > * system management network interfaces, then the (N) > * PCI roots per DF/SMN interface are functionally the > * same (for DF/SMN access) and N-1 are redundant. The > * N-1 PCI roots should be skipped per DF/SMN interface > * so the DF/SMN interfaces get mapped to the correct > * PCI root. You say "correct" as there is a special one. But the text before it says they're "functionally the same" wrt DF/SMN access so it sounds to me like we wanna map the first one we find and ignore the others. I.e., we wanna say "... so the DF/SMN interfaces get mapped to the *first* PCI root and the others N-1 ignored." Or am I misreading this? Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.