[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190530132015.GL28250@google.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 08:20:15 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keith.busch@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PCI/ATS: Add PRI support for PCIe VF devices
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 04:24:05PM -0700, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> But, regarding VF spec compliance checks, Is there any issue in having them
> in enable code ? Perhaps I can change dev_err to dev_warn and not return
> error if it found implementation errors. I found it useful to have them
> because it helped me in finding some faulty devices during my testing. Let
> me know your comments.
If you need quirks to make these non-compliant devices usable, we
should check for compliance. If not, my personal opinion is that we
shouldn't touch things we don't need.
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists