[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180328115018.31921-11-niklas.cassel@axis.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 13:50:15 +0200
From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
To: kishon@...com, cyrille.pitchen@...e-electrons.com,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Cc: Niklas Cassel <niklass@...s.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 10/12] PCI: endpoint: Make sure that BAR_5 does not have 64-bit flag set when clearing
Since a 64-bit BAR consists of a BAR pair, and since there is no
BAR after BAR_5, BAR_5 cannot be 64-bits wide.
This sanity check is done in pci_epc_clear_bar(), so that we don't need
to do this sanity check in all epc->ops->clear_bar() implementations.
Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>
---
Kishon made a review comment that he wanted this:
https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=152161168226203
Personally, I don't think that this check is needed,
since pci_epc_set_bar() already does this check,
and no one should modify the flags after pci_epc_set_bar()
has been called.
If everyone agrees, then this patch could be dropped.
drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c
index eccc942043cb..b0ee42739c3c 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c
@@ -285,7 +285,9 @@ void pci_epc_clear_bar(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no,
{
unsigned long flags;
- if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions)
+ if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions ||
+ (epf_bar->barno == BAR_5 &&
+ epf_bar->flags & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64))
return;
if (!epc->ops->clear_bar)
--
2.14.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists