On Fri, Apr 03, 2020 at 01:23:13PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 12:36:39PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 01:55:18PM +0000, Shiju Jose wrote: > > > The HiSilicon HIP PCIe controller is capable of handling errors > > > on root port and perform port reset separately at each root port. > > > > > > This patch add error handling driver for HIP PCIe controller to log > > > and report recoverable errors. Perform root port reset and restore > > > link status after the recovery. > > > > > > Following are some of the PCIe controller's recoverable errors > > > 1. completion transmission timeout error. > > > 2. CRS retry counter over the threshold error. > > > 3. ECC 2 bit errors > > > 4. AXI bresponse/rresponse errors etc. > > > > > > Also fix the following Smatch warning: > > > warn: should '((((1))) << (9 + i))' be a 64 bit type? > > > if (err->val_bits & BIT(HISI_PCIE_LOCAL_VALID_ERR_MISC + i)) > > > ^^^ This should be BIT_ULL() because it goes up to 9 + 32. > > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I'm glad you did this fix, and thanks for acknowledging Dan, but I > > don't think it's necessary to mention it in the commit log here > > because it won't really be useful in the future. It's only relevant > > when comparing the unmerged versions of this series, e.g., v4 compared > > to v3. To elaborate on that a little, I think the commit log should describe the change specifically made by the patch. You should be able to "git diff HEAD^" and match up the commit log with that diff output. You can't do that with this Smatch paragraph. > It's the kbuild template which suggests adding the Reported-by tags but > you're right that it's not really appropriate for patches that haven't > been merged yet. I wish there were a correct tag. I just saw yesterday > where a maintainer insisted that someone add a Suggested-by tag and I > don't think that's appropriate either. Adding tags for every reviewer or bot comment seems like overkill. I think the "lore" links are about the right level of attribution for this sort of thing, e.g., here: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=77d6b9094819ba55353de0ef92957f3f54f2c36c The Link: tag there gives you the whole v2 thread including review comments. And Matthew's cover letter even included a link to the original v1 posting. That seems perfect to me. Bjorn
