From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from webmail.solarflare.com ([12.187.104.25]:58199 "EHLO
	webmail.solarflare.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755823Ab3JCVxA (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 3 Oct 2013 17:53:00 -0400
Message-ID: <1380837174.3419.21.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 06/77] PCI/MSI: Factor out pci_get_msi_cap()
 interface
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Andy King <acking@vmware.com>, Jon Mason <jon.mason@intel.com>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org>,
	<linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>,
	<linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>, <linux390@de.ibm.com>,
	<linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>,
	<linux-ide@vger.kernel.org>, <iss_storagedev@hp.com>,
	<linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>, <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	<linux-driver@qlogic.com>,
	Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com>,
	"VMware, Inc." <pv-drivers@vmware.com>,
	<linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2013 22:52:54 +0100
In-Reply-To: <9c282c4ab92731c719d161d2db6fc54ce33891d9.1380703262.git.agordeev@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1380703262.git.agordeev@redhat.com>
	 <9c282c4ab92731c719d161d2db6fc54ce33891d9.1380703262.git.agordeev@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-pci.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2013-10-02 at 12:48 +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
[...]
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -812,6 +812,21 @@ static int pci_msi_check_device(struct pci_dev *dev, int nvec, int type)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +int pci_get_msi_cap(struct pci_dev *dev)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +	u16 msgctl;
> +
> +	if (!dev->msi_cap)
> +		return -EINVAL;
[...]
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -1144,6 +1144,11 @@ struct msix_entry {
>  
> 
>  #ifndef CONFIG_PCI_MSI
> +static inline int pci_get_msi_cap(struct pci_dev *dev)
> +{
> +	return -1;
[...]

Shouldn't this also return -EINVAL?

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.