linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 07/16] cxl/pci: Move existing CXL RAS initialization to CXL's cxl

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250417111857.0000224c@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 11:18:57 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>
CC: <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>, <nifan.cxl@...il.com>, <dave@...olabs.net>,
	<dave.jiang@...el.com>, <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
	<vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	<bhelgaas@...gle.com>, <mahesh@...ux.ibm.com>, <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
	<oohall@...il.com>, <Benjamin.Cheatham@....com>, <rrichter@....com>,
	<nathan.fontenot@....com>, <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com>,
	<lukas@...ner.de>, <ming.li@...omail.com>,
	<PradeepVineshReddy.Kodamati@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 07/16] cxl/pci: Move existing CXL RAS initialization
 to CXL's cxl_port driver

On Wed, 26 Mar 2025 20:47:08 -0500
Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com> wrote:

> Restricted CXL Host (RCH) Downstream Port RAS initialization currently
> resides in cxl/core/pci.c. The PCI source file is not otherwise associated
> with CXL port management.
> 
> Additional CXL Port RAS initialization will be added in future patches to
> support CXL Port devices' CXL errors.
> 
> Move existing RAS initialization to the cxl_port driver. The cxl_port
> driver is intended to manage CXL Endpoint and CXL Switch Ports.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>
Hi Terry,

Sorry for the interrupt nature of reviews on this. Crazy week.

Anyhow getting back to this series...

I'm not a fan of ifdefs in a c file.  Maybe we should consider
a port_aer.c and stubbing in the header as needed?

I think it ends up cleaner both in this patch and even more so later
in the series.

Jonathan

p.s. And now I need to run again.  I'll be back!