From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 976E4C28CC0 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:20:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CEDB25982 for ; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:20:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559222425; bh=WWUvePG/F5W9jMrKSPbf0krNclZJzDEIlb3GAxBTdPw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=AtpSdhwStVlF5LZUZz/s9nUmEg+b8Fv0m7Vr1ax9s7v/mgDUzIwwLYDPkzB+XYEcz XQuFryv+xyDgMTaxR8YhFi6Cj8CF7/r1wsZF5JeXA28wEoHUhPvwmq/1WvA0xKH4/v TJ2Ob3eZFH8FlljMrShZaniqx8IMXaAC1gVqqrvI= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726667AbfE3NUU (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 09:20:20 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:44032 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726253AbfE3NUR (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 May 2019 09:20:17 -0400 Received: from localhost (173-25-83-245.client.mchsi.com [173.25.83.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 295362596C; Thu, 30 May 2019 13:20:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559222416; bh=WWUvePG/F5W9jMrKSPbf0krNclZJzDEIlb3GAxBTdPw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=jv6lKTJpSAmsvbT9Oc+pbk9Pt+iz2dQ6CvIDOQrDijLggnudc1qnTgggJ8e2jc6Mo wrtl8xLxSaK9pbN0w/QXHk779vZzPu+F9/YAjdKVH5/wOZraWPKeQIFjwCBEBggF1X NrnY+sX+UwXZbkACNs8yTw5tRfrF2r1BC0jdczJc= Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 08:20:15 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy Cc: "Raj, Ashok" , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, keith.busch@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PCI/ATS: Add PRI support for PCIe VF devices Message-ID: <20190530132015.GL28250@google.com> References: <20190529225714.GE28250@google.com> <20190529230426.GB5108@araj-mobl1.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:24:05PM -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote: > But, regarding VF spec compliance checks, Is there any issue in having them > in enable code ? Perhaps I can change dev_err to dev_warn and not return > error if it found implementation errors. I found it useful to have them > because it helped me in finding some faulty devices during my testing. Let > me know your comments. If you need quirks to make these non-compliant devices usable, we should check for compliance. If not, my personal opinion is that we shouldn't touch things we don't need. Bjorn