public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
	Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>,
	Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI: Clean up pci_scan_slot()
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 16:30:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220412143040.1882096-2-schnelle@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220412143040.1882096-1-schnelle@linux.ibm.com>

While determining the next PCI function is factored out of
pci_scan_slot() into next_fn() the former still handles the first
function as a special case duplicating the code from the scan loop and
splitting the condition that the first function exits from it being
multifunction which is tested in next_fn().

Furthermore the non ARI branch of next_fn() mixes the case that
multifunction devices may have non-contiguous function ranges and dev
may thus be NULL with the multifunction requirement. It also signals
that no further functions need to be scanned by returning 0 which is
a valid function number.

Improve upon this by moving all conditions for having to scan for more
functions into next_fn() and make them obvious and commented.

By changing next_fn() to return -ENODEV instead of 0 when there is no
next function we can then handle the initial function inside the loop
and deduplicate the shared handling.

No functional change is intended.

Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
---
 drivers/pci/probe.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/pci/probe.c b/drivers/pci/probe.c
index 17a969942d37..389aa1f9cb2c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/probe.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/probe.c
@@ -2579,33 +2579,35 @@ struct pci_dev *pci_scan_single_device(struct pci_bus *bus, int devfn)
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_scan_single_device);
 
-static unsigned int next_fn(struct pci_bus *bus, struct pci_dev *dev,
-			    unsigned int fn)
+static int next_fn(struct pci_bus *bus, struct pci_dev *dev, int fn)
 {
 	int pos;
 	u16 cap = 0;
 	unsigned int next_fn;
 
-	if (pci_ari_enabled(bus)) {
-		if (!dev)
-			return 0;
+	if (dev && pci_ari_enabled(bus)) {
 		pos = pci_find_ext_capability(dev, PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_ARI);
 		if (!pos)
-			return 0;
+			return -ENODEV;
 
 		pci_read_config_word(dev, pos + PCI_ARI_CAP, &cap);
 		next_fn = PCI_ARI_CAP_NFN(cap);
 		if (next_fn <= fn)
-			return 0;	/* protect against malformed list */
+			return -ENODEV;	/* protect against malformed list */
 
 		return next_fn;
 	}
 
-	/* dev may be NULL for non-contiguous multifunction devices */
-	if (!dev || dev->multifunction)
-		return (fn + 1) % 8;
-
-	return 0;
+	/* only multifunction devices may have more functions */
+	if (dev && !dev->multifunction)
+		return -ENODEV;
+	/*
+	 * A function 0 is required but multifunction devices may
+	 * be non-contiguous so dev can be NULL otherwise.
+	 */
+	if (!fn && !dev)
+		return -ENODEV;
+	return (fn <= 6) ? fn + 1 : -ENODEV;
 }
 
 static int only_one_child(struct pci_bus *bus)
@@ -2643,24 +2645,19 @@ static int only_one_child(struct pci_bus *bus)
  */
 int pci_scan_slot(struct pci_bus *bus, int devfn)
 {
-	unsigned int fn, nr = 0;
-	struct pci_dev *dev;
+	int fn, nr = 0;
+	struct pci_dev *dev = NULL;
 
 	if (only_one_child(bus) && (devfn > 0))
 		return 0; /* Already scanned the entire slot */
 
-	dev = pci_scan_single_device(bus, devfn);
-	if (!dev)
-		return 0;
-	if (!pci_dev_is_added(dev))
-		nr++;
-
-	for (fn = next_fn(bus, dev, 0); fn > 0; fn = next_fn(bus, dev, fn)) {
+	for (fn = 0; fn >= 0; fn = next_fn(bus, dev, fn)) {
 		dev = pci_scan_single_device(bus, devfn + fn);
 		if (dev) {
 			if (!pci_dev_is_added(dev))
 				nr++;
-			dev->multifunction = 1;
+			if (nr > 1)
+				dev->multifunction = 1;
 		}
 	}
 
-- 
2.32.0


  reply	other threads:[~2022-04-12 14:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-12 14:30 [PATCH v2 0/4] PCI: Rework pci_scan_slot() and isolated PCI functions Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-12 14:30 ` Niklas Schnelle [this message]
2022-04-12 15:24   ` [PATCH v2 1/4] PCI: Clean up pci_scan_slot() Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-12 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI: Move jailhouse's isolated function handling to pci_scan_slot() Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-12 16:28   ` kernel test robot
2022-04-13  7:55     ` Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-12 19:43   ` kernel test robot
2022-04-12 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] PCI: Extend isolated function probing to s390 Niklas Schnelle
2022-04-12 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] s390/pci: allow zPCI zbus without a function zero Niklas Schnelle

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=20220412143040.1882096-2-schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pmorel@linux.ibm.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