public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@nxp.com>,
	Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH pci] PCI: don't skip probing entire device if first fn OF node has status = "disabled"
Date: Wed, 31 May 2023 02:15:09 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230530231509.4bybb5nw4xyxxq2m@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZHZ4TFjFLrKeHPGi@bhelgaas>

On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 05:27:24PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Ah, you're right, sorry I missed that.  Dispensing with the SERDES
> details would make this more obvious.

Lesson learned. When I had just gotten out of college, every time I asked
the coworkers in my company what they're up to, I was amazed by them just
proceeding to tell me all the nitty gritty details of what they're doing
and debugging, like I was supposed to understand or care for that matter.
"Dude, can't you just paint the high level idea without using dorky words?"
Now I'm one of them...

> Not sure why this needs to change the pci_scan_slot() path, since
> Function 0 is present and enumerable even though it's not useful in
> some cases.

Well, the rationale for me was pretty simple: it's the pci_scan_slot() logic
that I want to change - continue enumeration in some cases when the pci_dev
for fn 0 is NULL - and I'm otherwise perfectly okay with pci_scan_slot()
getting a NULL pci_dev from pci_setup_device() for fn 0. That wasn't something
I had in mind to change.

This patch is what it takes to propagate a qualifier, without leaving a mark
in any structure, for that NULL return code: is it NULL because enumeration
came up with nothing, or is it NULL because pci_set_of_node() said so?

> Seems like something in pci_set_of_node() or a quirk could do whatever
> you need to do.

Could you help me out with a more detailed hint here? I'm not really
familiar with the PCI core code. You probably mean to suggest leaving a
stateful flag somewhere, though I'm not exactly sure where that is, that
would reach pci_scan_slot() enough to be able to alter its decision.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-30 23:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-21 11:51 [PATCH pci] PCI: don't skip probing entire device if first fn OF node has status = "disabled" Vladimir Oltean
2023-05-29 20:48 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-05-30 21:58 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-05-30 22:04   ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-05-30 22:27     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-05-30 23:15       ` Vladimir Oltean [this message]
2023-05-31 16:56         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-05-31 16:58           ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-05-31 20:24             ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-06-01  8:11               ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-01 15:44                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-06-01 16:33                   ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-01 17:51                     ` Bjorn Helgaas
2023-06-01 22:15                       ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-02  4:06                         ` 陈华才
2023-06-02  7:21                         ` Liu Peibao
2023-06-02  7:36                           ` Jianmin Lv
2023-06-02 10:16                             ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-03  2:35                               ` Jianmin Lv
2023-06-04  8:55                                 ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-05  0:59                                   ` Jianmin Lv
2023-06-05  9:34                                     ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-06-16  2:12                                       ` Jianmin Lv
2023-06-16 17:57                                   ` Rob Herring
2023-08-03 10:39                                     ` Vladimir Oltean
2023-08-03 11:34                                       ` Vladimir Oltean

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=20230530231509.4bybb5nw4xyxxq2m@skbuf \
    --to=vladimir.oltean@nxp.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=claudiu.manoil@nxp.com \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael@walle.cc \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    /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