Hi Naveen, On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 1:52 PM Naveen Naidu <naveennaidu479@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 18/10, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 5:33 PM Naveen Naidu <naveennaidu479@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > An MMIO read from a PCI device that doesn't exist or doesn't respond > > > causes a PCI error. There's no real data to return to satisfy the > > > CPU read, so most hardware fabricates ~0 data. > > > > > > The host controller drivers sets the error response values (~0) and > > > returns an error when faulty hardware read occurs. But the error > > > response value (~0) is already being set in PCI_OP_READ and > > > PCI_USER_READ_CONFIG whenever a read by host controller driver fails. > > > > > > Thus, it's no longer necessary for the host controller drivers to > > > fabricate any error response. > > > > > > This helps unify PCI error response checking and make error check > > > consistent and easier to find. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Naveen Naidu <naveennaidu479@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Thanks for your patch! > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar-host.c > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar-host.c > > > @@ -161,10 +161,8 @@ static int rcar_pcie_read_conf(struct pci_bus *bus, unsigned int devfn, > > > > > > ret = rcar_pcie_config_access(host, RCAR_PCI_ACCESS_READ, > > > bus, devfn, where, val); > > > - if (ret != PCIBIOS_SUCCESSFUL) { > > > - *val = 0xffffffff; > > > > I don't see the behavior you describe in PCI_OP_READ(), so dropping > > this will lead to returning an uninitialized value? > > > > Hello Geert, > > Thank you for looking into the patch. > > The described behaviour for PCI_OP_READ is part of the 01/24 [1] patch of > the series. > > [1]: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/b913b4966938b7cad8c049dc34093e6c4b2fae68.1634306198.git.naveennaidu479@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u OK, in that case: Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> > It looks like, I did not add proper receipients for that patch and hence > is leading to confusion. I really apologize for that. Indeed. If there are dependencies, all recipients should receive all dependencies. > I do not know what the right approach here should be, should I resend > the entire patch series, adding proper receipients OR should I reply to > each of the patches for the drivers and add the link to the patch. I did > not want to spam people with a lot of mails so I was confused as to what > the right option is. Probably a resend would be best. Thanks! Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds