From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
To: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI/MSI: Simplify default_restore_msi_irq()
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 15:06:24 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140930210624.GE5625@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1411979733-28523-1-git-send-email-wangyijing@huawei.com>
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 04:35:33PM +0800, Yijing Wang wrote:
> Both MSI and MSI-X irq will be associated to msi_desc
> in arch MSI code, e.g. in x86
> arch_setup_msi_irqs()
> native_setup_msi_irqs()
> setup_msi_irq()
> irq_set_msi_desc_off()
>
> Use irq_get_msi_desc() to get the MSI-X msi_desc for
> simplification.
Holy cow, this is a mess (not your patch, but the existing split between
common code and arch code). You showed one path above, but how am I
supposed to know that *all* the paths make this association correctly? If
all the paths do it, why isn't the association done in some common code to
begin with? Is this telling us that the arch interface is designed wrong?
No doubt there's some implicit knowledge, like "there's no way MSI can work
at all unless the arch code makes this association," but I don't know
enough about MSI to have that knowledge, and consequently I really can't
convince myself that this patch is safe for everybody.
> Also use __write_msi_msg() instead
> of write_msi_msg() to avoid the redundant calls.
I applied this part to pci/msi for v3.18 since it's unrelated.
> Signed-off-by: Yijing Wang <wangyijing@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/msi.c | 13 ++-----------
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index d077749..e0916ad 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -109,18 +109,9 @@ static void default_restore_msi_irq(struct pci_dev *dev, int irq)
> {
> struct msi_desc *entry;
>
> - entry = NULL;
> - if (dev->msix_enabled) {
> - list_for_each_entry(entry, &dev->msi_list, list) {
> - if (irq == entry->irq)
> - break;
> - }
> - } else if (dev->msi_enabled) {
> - entry = irq_get_msi_desc(irq);
> - }
> -
> + entry = irq_get_msi_desc(irq);
> if (entry)
> - write_msi_msg(irq, &entry->msg);
> + __write_msi_msg(entry, &entry->msg);
> }
>
> void __weak arch_restore_msi_irqs(struct pci_dev *dev)
> --
> 1.7.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-30 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-29 8:35 [PATCH v2 1/2] PCI/MSI: Simplify default_restore_msi_irq() Yijing Wang
2014-09-30 21:06 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2014-10-08 1:39 ` Yijing Wang
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=20140930210624.GE5625@google.com \
--to=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wangyijing@huawei.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).