[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMbrxP/5D4vVLE0j@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 06:40:20 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, cohuck@...hat.com,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
aviadye@...dia.com, oren@...dia.com, shahafs@...dia.com,
parav@...dia.com, artemp@...dia.com, kwankhede@...dia.com,
ACurrid@...dia.com, cjia@...dia.com, yishaih@...dia.com,
kevin.tian@...el.com, hch@...radead.org, targupta@...dia.com,
shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com, liulongfang@...wei.com,
yan.y.zhao@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] PCI: add matching checks for driver_override
binding
On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 11:19:46AM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> what about the following code ?
>
> @@ -152,12 +152,28 @@ static const struct pci_device_id
> *pci_match_device(struct pci_driver *drv,
> ?????????????? }
> ?????????????? spin_unlock(&drv->dynids.lock);
>
> -???????????? if (!found_id)
> -???????????????????????????? found_id = pci_match_id(drv->id_table, dev);
> +???????????? if (found_id)
> +???????????????????????????? return found_id;
Something is broken in your mailer because this does not look like code
at all.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists