From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-gg0-f179.google.com (mail-gg0-f179.google.com [209.85.161.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC04D2C016B for ; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 05:11:20 +1100 (EST) Received: by mail-gg0-f179.google.com with SMTP id q1so1186583gge.10 for ; Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 14:10:43 -0400 From: Tejun Heo To: Alexander Gordeev Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 05/77] PCI/MSI: Convert pci_msix_table_size() to a public interface Message-ID: <20131007181043.GA27396@htj.dyndns.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "VMware, Inc." , linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Andy King , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, iss_storagedev@hp.com, linux-driver@qlogic.com, Bjorn Helgaas , Dan Williams , Jon Mason , Solarflare linux maintainers , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Martin Schwidefsky , linux390@de.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hello, On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:48:21PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > Make pci_msix_table_size() to return a error code if the device > does not support MSI-X. This update is needed to facilitate a > forthcoming re-design MSI/MSI-X interrupts enabling pattern. > > Device drivers will use this interface to obtain maximum number > of MSI-X interrupts the device supports and use that value in > the following call to pci_enable_msix() interface. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Gordeev Hmmm... I probably missed something but why is this necessary? To discern between -EINVAL and -ENOSPC? If so, does that really matter? Thanks. -- tejun