[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f1ddffe9-e1ea-45b5-9042-e9aa6ce41e34@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 10:57:17 -0500
From: "Bowman, Terry" <terry.bowman@....com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Cc: dave@...olabs.net, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com, dave.jiang@...el.com,
alison.schofield@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
shiju.jose@...wei.com, ming.li@...omail.com,
Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@....com, rrichter@....com,
dan.carpenter@...aro.org, PradeepVineshReddy.Kodamati@....com,
Benjamin.Cheatham@....com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com,
linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org, alucerop@....com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 20/23] CXL/PCI: Export and rename merge_result() to
pci_ers_merge_result()
On 8/27/2025 3:04 AM, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 08:35:35PM -0500, Terry Bowman wrote:
>> +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
>> @@ -2760,6 +2760,17 @@ static inline bool pci_is_thunderbolt_attached(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> void pci_uevent_ers(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum pci_ers_result err_type);
>> #endif
>>
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_PCIEAER)
>> +pci_ers_result_t pci_ers_merge_result(enum pci_ers_result orig,
>> + enum pci_ers_result new);
>> +#else
>> +static inline pci_ers_result_t pci_ers_merge_result(enum pci_ers_result orig,
>> + enum pci_ers_result new)
>> +{
>> + return PCI_ERS_RESULT_NONE;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> #include <linux/dma-mapping.h>
>>
>> #define pci_emerg(pdev, fmt, arg...) dev_emerg(&(pdev)->dev, fmt, ##arg)
> Would it be possible for you to just declare a local version of
> pci_ers_merge_result() within drivers/cxl/ which is encapsulated by
> "#ifndef CONFIG_PCIEAER"?
>
> That would avoid the need to make this public in include/linux/pci.h.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Lukas
Hi Lukas,
The move of local merge_result() to exported pci_merge_result() was requested
by Jonathan Cameron:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cxl/20250627120541.00003a14@huawei.com/
I believe the intent was to make reuse of the PCI merge function to keep the PCI
and CXL UCE flows somewhat similar.
Jonathan may have a better explanation. I'm not opposed to either solution but
adding details here for discussion with Jonathan.
Regards,
Terry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists