On 6/16/2023 12:04 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
From: Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2023 6:03 AM
+
+int pds_vfio_register_client_cmd(struct pds_vfio_pci_device *pds_vfio)
+{
+ struct pci_dev *pdev = pds_vfio_to_pci_dev(pds_vfio);
+ char devname[PDS_DEVNAME_LEN];
+ int ci;
+
+ snprintf(devname, sizeof(devname), "%s.%d-%u",
PDS_LM_DEV_NAME,
+ pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus), pds_vfio->pci_id);
+
+ ci = pds_client_register(pci_physfn(pdev), devname);
+ if (ci <= 0)
+ return ci;
'ci' cannot be 0 since pds_client_register() already converts 0 into
-EIO.
Yeah, Shameer already mentioned this and I have already fixed this issue
for the next revision. Thanks.
btw the description of pds_client_register() is wrong. It said return
0 on success. should be positive client_id on success.
Yeah, this was also mentioned by Shameer. I will submit a follow on
patch that updates the documentation in pds_client_register(). Thanks.
+struct pci_dev *pds_vfio_to_pci_dev(struct pds_vfio_pci_device *pds_vfio)
+{
+ return pds_vfio->vfio_coredev.pdev;
+}
Does this wrapper actually save the length?o
It wasn't so much about length but encapsulating the multiple
de-references and multiple uses into a function call.
+ dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
+ "%s: PF %#04x VF %#04x (%d) vf_id %d domain %d
pds_vfio %p\n",
+ __func__, pci_dev_id(pdev->physfn), pds_vfio->pci_id,
+ pds_vfio->pci_id, pds_vfio->vf_id, pci_domain_nr(pdev->bus),
+ pds_vfio);
why printing pds_vfio->pci_id twice?
Will fix. Thanks.
+#define PDS_LM_DEV_NAME PDS_CORE_DRV_NAME "."
PDS_DEV_TYPE_LM_STR
+
should this name include a 'vfio' string?
This aligns with what our DSC/firmware expects, so no it's not needed.
