[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210610224143.GA2785655@bjorn-Precision-5520>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:41:43 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Dejin Zheng <zhengdejin5@...il.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
rric@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, wsa@...nel.org,
Sanket.Goswami@....com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] PCI: Introduce pcim_alloc_irq_vectors()
On Mon, Jun 07, 2021 at 11:39:13PM +0800, Dejin Zheng wrote:
> Introduce pcim_alloc_irq_vectors(), a device-managed version of
> pci_alloc_irq_vectors(). Introducing this function can simplify
> the error handling path in many drivers.
>
> And use pci_free_irq_vectors() to replace some code in pcim_release(),
> they are equivalent, and no functional change. It is more explicit
> that pcim_alloc_irq_vectors() is a device-managed function.
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> index 452351025a09..e3b3fc59bd35 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c
> @@ -1989,10 +1989,7 @@ static void pcim_release(struct device *gendev, void *res)
> struct pci_devres *this = res;
> int i;
>
> - if (dev->msi_enabled)
> - pci_disable_msi(dev);
> - if (dev->msix_enabled)
> - pci_disable_msix(dev);
> + pci_free_irq_vectors(dev);
If I understand correctly, this hunk is a nice simplification, but
actually has nothing to do with making pcim_alloc_irq_vectors(). I
have it split to a separate patch in my local tree. Or am I wrong
about that?
> for (i = 0; i < DEVICE_COUNT_RESOURCE; i++)
> if (this->region_mask & (1 << i))
> diff --git a/include/linux/pci.h b/include/linux/pci.h
> index c20211e59a57..5783262c4643 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> @@ -1730,6 +1730,7 @@ static inline struct pci_dev *pci_get_class(unsigned int class,
>
> static inline void pci_set_master(struct pci_dev *dev) { }
> static inline int pci_enable_device(struct pci_dev *dev) { return -EIO; }
> +static inline int pci_is_managed(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return 0; }
> static inline void pci_disable_device(struct pci_dev *dev) { }
> static inline int pcim_enable_device(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return -EIO; }
> static inline int pci_assign_resource(struct pci_dev *dev, int i)
> @@ -1825,6 +1826,30 @@ pci_alloc_irq_vectors(struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned int min_vecs,
> NULL);
> }
>
> +/**
> + * pcim_alloc_irq_vectors - a device-managed pci_alloc_irq_vectors()
> + * @dev: PCI device to operate on
> + * @min_vecs: minimum number of vectors required (must be >= 1)
> + * @max_vecs: maximum (desired) number of vectors
> + * @flags: flags or quirks for the allocation
> + *
> + * Return the number of vectors allocated, (which might be smaller than
> + * @max_vecs) if successful, or a negative error code on error. If less
> + * than @min_vecs interrupt vectors are available for @dev the function
> + * will fail with -ENOSPC.
> + *
> + * It depends on calling pcim_enable_device() to make IRQ resources
> + * manageable.
> + */
> +static inline int
> +pcim_alloc_irq_vectors(struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned int min_vecs,
> + unsigned int max_vecs, unsigned int flags)
> +{
> + if (!pci_is_managed(dev))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return pci_alloc_irq_vectors(dev, min_vecs, max_vecs, flags);
This is great, but can you explain how pci_alloc_irq_vectors()
magically becomes a managed interface if we've already called
pcim_enable_device()?
I certainly believe it does; I'd just like to put a hint in the commit
log since my 5 minutes of grepping around didn't make it obvious to
me.
I see that pcim_enable_device() sets pdev->is_managed, but I didn't
find the connection between that and pci_alloc_irq_vectors().
> +}
> +
> /* Include architecture-dependent settings and functions */
>
> #include <asm/pci.h>
> --
> 2.30.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists