From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.7]) (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 73E1E14F9FB; Sun, 5 Jan 2025 16:43:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.7 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736095399; cv=none; b=ntQYDVPk0GFdkE5GbgV6l0gIiBGCBFfaO9Badxc8X1zScmrSSd7QMxpGBKHRAjsczVx98j5zur+L06bEPc2VC04PCkKWES7naVsaiSsB4r+yRWjXRZLQoWPtMVvKRhlYPdrw72Rh2DemzIuUBH1DlcmtT81rVU9mwN0dwLY8HFQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736095399; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vvJ+Yp3leDodK0CvCdi9+gRe6EvxCrT8p2X4U/O0HQc=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ToH2BNhNffMIl5mn1P0elowJCeh0l8m9QdkHGfhnwakLbPJfP6/deqUmmwHng23PxvuXjGqANYzKYrRGxJZPf2jtV3tnkVvwcmRIk6bRgxbZw9gsjd1idwsnEMuDGfCqDYnmL5w3shQNkL2Nw/P1/QBJXBbJHcOffafe8AZlxzk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=F/6pZt1O; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.7 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="F/6pZt1O" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1736095397; x=1767631397; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version:content-id; bh=vvJ+Yp3leDodK0CvCdi9+gRe6EvxCrT8p2X4U/O0HQc=; b=F/6pZt1O1MbNe6skYxAtIKm7zn3iPBViANAzYv0kwNOMaYUp0bOqPlrE oROP0s6ALD9LAo/VcXwJq0y0f8vqydDu7Jzrk44VRpov2gJrLAmIQc0B2 8aQR1lJlij8B6v48qpJ9JcDxvVBbViONaOcAfZupMJcRtLBdZRS3zqElQ HAxwDaukHqvy4uweggE8LOjqrpMmhCxImZ3Dve7NQRqgm4vHIwT/L8nwL tZegtwGUoFkiogRL06HLACzVkE9riaIj6wEIoRuWpdLGlAxKRqkjLwUYt NC2sAPzlF2eMCa3qQZLVTpO8wTRrU9Oy+sUmlCQeQlAK6NhnVuWg4myqa w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5LwvYmLCTk6SCSS83far7g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: fgN4YZbqTaGBDLacMEEC7w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11306"; a="61632337" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,291,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="61632337" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by fmvoesa101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jan 2025 08:43:16 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 6sYrLDRiQaySabinfUYJsA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Hgoa4TgmTTCtmTY1unR+UQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="106870333" Received: from ijarvine-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.18]) by fmviesa005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Jan 2025 08:43:10 -0800 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2025 18:43:07 +0200 (EET) To: Lukas Wunner cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Wilczy??ski , "Maciej W . Rozycki" , Jonathan Cameron , Alexandru Gagniuc , Krishna chaitanya chundru , Srinivas Pandruvada , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Smita Koralahalli , LKML , Daniel Lezcano , Amit Kucheria , Zhang Rui , Christophe JAILLET Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 7/9] PCI/bwctrl: Add API to set PCIe Link Speed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <20241018144755.7875-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> <20241018144755.7875-8-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="8323328-1558070145-1736093219=:924" Content-ID: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1558070145-1736093219=:924 Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Content-ID: On Thu, 2 Jan 2025, Lukas Wunner wrote: > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 05:47:53PM +0300, Ilpo J=E4rvinen wrote: > > @@ -142,9 +304,11 @@ static int pcie_bwnotif_probe(struct pcie_device *= srv) > > =09if (ret) > > =09=09return ret; > > =20 > > -=09scoped_guard(rwsem_write, &pcie_bwctrl_lbms_rwsem) { > > -=09=09port->link_bwctrl =3D no_free_ptr(data); > > -=09=09pcie_bwnotif_enable(srv); > > +=09scoped_guard(rwsem_write, &pcie_bwctrl_setspeed_rwsem) { > > +=09=09scoped_guard(rwsem_write, &pcie_bwctrl_lbms_rwsem) { > > +=09=09=09port->link_bwctrl =3D no_free_ptr(data); > > +=09=09=09pcie_bwnotif_enable(srv); > > +=09=09} > > =09} >=20 > The "data" pointer is allocated with devm_kzalloc(). > There's no __free(kfree) anywhere. >=20 > So what's the motivation for the no_free_ptr()? > Is this a remnant of an earlier version of the patch set that can be dele= ted > or is there actually a purpose to it? Remnant it was so it is okay to remove it in your fix. --=20 i. --8323328-1558070145-1736093219=:924--