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=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 6E130C67863 for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 16:21:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA9F2159B for ; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 16:21:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="1s1VEOEG" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EDA9F2159B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727528AbeJUAcW (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Oct 2018 20:32:22 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:43558 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727485AbeJUAcW (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Oct 2018 20:32:22 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.107] (cpe-174-109-247-98.nc.res.rr.com [174.109.247.98]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 92A6521550; Sat, 20 Oct 2018 16:21:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1540052483; bh=TJIhZxaILhxwOPSp+8ssxgIcNcajSOg48sQLaZUEmJs=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=1s1VEOEGAi4R/7UgEZweQaf6Z6c2e37Sqr6e+11EyBekCbEtLfyqTagGGKjUJ2OFB bITdUyut7qUABjAG+X8BbiAkhTTRw33q0N/+Kbpw147WHJNYjVqFT4R9BigSLQulQ3 9vppM6IIzw5i7AxCkAN9gQZ+4NKukD6GvSPLSNBE= Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] PCI: Expose reset_type to users of __pci_reset_function_locked() To: Bjorn Helgaas Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Derek Chickles , Satanand Burla , Felix Manlunas , Raghu Vatsavayi , "David S. Miller" , Bjorn Helgaas , Boris Ostrovsky , Juergen Gross , Jia-Ju Bai , Alex Williamson References: <20181019021132.14743-1-okaya@kernel.org> <20181020020908.GQ5906@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> <8f368f0b-b9b9-54ab-bd46-88635b9a43e5@kernel.org> <20181020150353.GR5906@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> From: Sinan Kaya Message-ID: Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2018 12:21:21 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181020150353.GR5906@bhelgaas-glaptop.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On 10/20/2018 11:03 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> We can also drop the series if we think that current API are good enough >> and nuances are well understood. > I don't think the current API is good enough:) It's just a small > matter of sorting out a better one. I guess the next logical question is if you have any suggestion. merge __pci_reset_function_locked() and pci_reset_function_locked(). Then save the context all the time? What about locked vs. unlocked APIs? If there is a way to know if lock is being held by the currently running task, we could skip the locking business and unify these two APIs.