From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp02.au.ibm.com (e23smtp02.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.144]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 031AB140084 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:45:03 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp02.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:45:02 +1000 Received: from d23relay04.au.ibm.com (d23relay04.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.120]) by d23dlp03.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D51D33578052 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:45:00 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay04.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s3M9O8ne57934072 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:24:09 +1000 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s3M9ixbp032295 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:44:59 +1000 Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 17:44:56 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] powerpc/powernv: clear the refcount for pci_dev on powernv platform Message-ID: <20140422094456.GA28188@richard> References: <1398047119-6861-1-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140421233423.GA4023@shangw> <20140422074437.GB6431@richard> <1398155109.19682.89.camel@pasglop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1398155109.19682.89.camel@pasglop> Cc: aik@au1.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Gavin Shan Reply-To: Wei Yang List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 06:25:09PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 15:44 +0800, Wei Yang wrote: >> So this patch(the 2nd one) doesn't contribute to clear the warning and >> error. >> Only the first patch did it. Please ignore this one. > >But is it correct ? It's not right to keep a refcount elevated if we >don't have to. The code refcount is introduced in commit 184cd4a3(powerpc/powernv: PCI support for p7IOC under OPAL v2). To me, it looks not necessary. > >Gavin, can you get to the bottom of that refcount business ? > >Cheers, >Ben. > -- Richard Yang Help you, Help me