From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e28smtp08.in.ibm.com (e28smtp08.in.ibm.com [122.248.162.8]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D2D6B1A006B for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 19:35:39 +1000 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp08.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:05:31 +0530 Received: from d28relay05.in.ibm.com (d28relay05.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.62]) by d28dlp03.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C65811258048 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:05:58 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (d28av04.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.66]) by d28relay05.in.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s8C9ZtUe43909300 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:05:56 +0530 Received: from d28av04.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av04.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s8C9ZRDJ003079 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:05:28 +0530 Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 17:35:25 +0800 From: Wei Yang To: Gavin Shan Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] powerpc/eeh: Fix kernel crash when passing through VF Message-ID: <20140912093525.GA6916@richard> Reply-To: Wei Yang References: <1410406921-8557-1-git-send-email-weiyang@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1410494123.17540.2.camel@concordia> <20140912050518.GA17933@shangw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20140912050518.GA17933@shangw> Cc: Wei Yang , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 03:05:18PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote: >On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 01:55:23PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: >>On Thu, 2014-09-11 at 11:42 +0800, Wei Yang wrote: >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh.c >>> index 4a45ba8..403445e 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh.c >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh.c >>> @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ int eeh_pci_enable(struct eeh_pe *pe, int function) >>> int pcibios_set_pcie_reset_state(struct pci_dev *dev, enum pcie_reset_state state) >>> { >>> struct eeh_dev *edev = pci_dev_to_eeh_dev(dev); >>> - struct eeh_pe *pe = edev->pe; >>> + struct eeh_pe *pe = edev ? edev->pe : NULL; >>> >>> if (!pe) { >>> pr_err("%s: No PE found on PCI device %s\n", >> >> >>We seem to do this or something similar in a few places. Is it worth having a >>pci_dev_to_eeh_pe() inline? >> > >Yes, maybe we just need a eeh_dev_to_pe() because converting >pci_dev to eeh_dev is already coverred by pci_dev_to_eeh_dev(). > >With eeh_dev_to_pe(), it looks like this: > >struct pci_dev *pdev; >struct eeh_dev *edev = pci_dev_to_eeh_dev(pdev); >struct eeh_pe *pe = eeh_dev_to_pe(edev); > >Or another case: > >struct device_node *dn; >struct eeh_dev *edev = of_node_to_eeh_dev(dn); >struct eeh_pe *pe = eeh_dev_to_pe(edev); With these helper, it would be more consolidate to jump between those data. Gavin, You would add these helpers? Or would like me to add them? > >Thanks, >Gavin > >>cheers >> >> -- Richard Yang Help you, Help me