On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 08:44:26PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 11:24:09AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2019-01-29 10:47 a.m., jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > +bool pci_test_p2p(struct device *devA, struct device *devB)
> > > +{
> > > + struct pci_dev *pciA, *pciB;
> > > + bool ret;
> > > + int tmp;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * For now we only support PCIE peer to peer but other inter-connect
> > > + * can be added.
> > > + */
> > > + pciA = find_parent_pci_dev(devA);
> > > + pciB = find_parent_pci_dev(devB);
> > > + if (pciA == NULL || pciB == NULL) {
> > > + ret = false;
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + tmp = upstream_bridge_distance(pciA, pciB, NULL);
> > > + ret = tmp < 0 ? false : true;
> > > +
> > > +out:
> > > + pci_dev_put(pciB);
> > > + pci_dev_put(pciA);
> > > + return false;
> > > +}
> > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pci_test_p2p);
> >
> > This function only ever returns false....
>
> I guess it was nevr actually tested :(
>
> I feel really worried about passing random 'struct device' pointers into
> the PCI layer. Are we _sure_ it can handle this properly?
>
Oh yes i fixed it on the test rig and forgot to patch
my local git tree. My bad.
Cheers,
Jérôme
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
