[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121201160144.GC12274@liondog.tnic>
Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2012 17:01:44 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Lance Ortiz <lance.ortiz@...com>
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com, lance_ortiz@...mail.com, jiang.liu@...wei.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mchehab@...hat.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] aerdrv: Enhanced AER logging
On Sat, Dec 01, 2012 at 04:51:30PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > @@ -281,9 +286,17 @@ static void cper_print_pcie(const char *pfx, const struct cper_sec_pcie *pcie,
> > "%s""bridge: secondary_status: 0x%04x, control: 0x%04x\n",
> > pfx, pcie->bridge.secondary_status, pcie->bridge.control);
> > #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER
> > - if (pcie->validation_bits & CPER_PCIE_VALID_AER_INFO) {
> > + dev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pcie->device_id.segment,
> > + pcie->device_id.bus, pcie->device_id.function);
> > + if (!dev)
> > + pr_info("PCI AER Cannot get PCI device %04x:%02x:%02x.%d\n",
> > + pcie->device_id.segment, pcie->device_id.bus,
> > + pcie->device_id.slot, pcie->device_id.function);
> > +
> > + if (pcie->validation_bits & CPER_PCIE_VALID_AER_INFO && dev) {
>
> You don't need to test dev here because you've tested for !dev in the
> line above...
>
> > struct aer_capability_regs *aer_regs = (void *)pcie->aer_info;
> > - cper_print_aer(pfx, gdata->error_severity, aer_regs);
> > + cper_print_aer(dev, gdata->error_severity, aer_regs);
> > + pci_dev_put(dev);
>
> ... and thus this pci_dev_put() has to be unconditional, i.e. after the
> if test.
Not entirely correct: you don't need to test dev if you return early in
the !dev case. And AFAICT you should return early because if you can't
get dev, you can't call cper_print_aer() afterwards.
IOW, this hunk should look like this:
@@ -281,10 +286,19 @@ static void cper_print_pcie(const char *pfx, const struct cper_sec_pcie *pcie,
"%s""bridge: secondary_status: 0x%04x, control: 0x%04x\n",
pfx, pcie->bridge.secondary_status, pcie->bridge.control);
#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_APEI_PCIEAER
- if (pcie->validation_bits & CPER_PCIE_VALID_AER_INFO) {
- struct aer_capability_regs *aer_regs = (void *)pcie->aer_info;
- cper_print_aer(pfx, gdata->error_severity, aer_regs);
+ dev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(pcie->device_id.segment,
+ pcie->device_id.bus, pcie->device_id.function);
+ if (!dev) {
+ pr_info("PCI AER Cannot get PCI device %04x:%02x:%02x.%d\n",
+ pcie->device_id.segment, pcie->device_id.bus,
+ pcie->device_id.slot, pcie->device_id.function);
+ return;
}
+
+ if (pcie->validation_bits & CPER_PCIE_VALID_AER_INFO)
+ cper_print_aer(dev, gdata->error_severity,
+ (struct aer_capability_regs *)pcie->aer_info);
+ pci_dev_put(dev);
#endif
}
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists