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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <1dabbc51-d3be-4b10-891a-3cab5e7a58bb@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:25:21 -0500
From: "Bowman, Terry" <terry.bowman@....com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.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 4/17/2025 5:18 AM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> 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!
Hi Jonathan,

Sorry, I missed this email earlier. I understand your point. I'll keep that in
mind for new changes and revisit the series to remove those where possible.

-Terry