On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 03:09:41PM -0700, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 3:15 AM, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > As result of deprecation of MSI-X/MSI enablement functions
>> > pci_enable_msix() and pci_enable_msi_block() all drivers
>> > using these two interfaces need to be updated to use the
>> > new pci_enable_msi_range() and pci_enable_msix_range()
>> > interfaces.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Cc: linux-pci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > ---
>> > drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c | 17 ++++++++++-------
>> > 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c
>> > index 986f8ea..4e46eca 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/portdrv_core.c
>> > @@ -99,8 +99,9 @@ static int pcie_port_enable_msix(struct pci_dev *dev, int *vectors, int mask)
>> > for (i = 0; i < nr_entries; i++)
>> > msix_entries[i].entry = i;
>> >
>> > - status = pci_enable_msix(dev, msix_entries, nr_entries);
>> > - if (status)
>> > + status = pci_enable_msix_range(dev,
>> > + msix_entries, nr_entries, nr_entries);
>>
>> This is a place we could use pci_enable_msix_exact(), isn't it? (Also below.)
>
> Yes, absolutely.
>
> I posted it (and other updates) as is, since I understood
> pci_enable_msix_exact() is not going to make it into 3.14. Was I wrong here?
Ooh, sorry, I do plan to merge pci_enable_msix_exact() and some of the
other infrastructure patches for v3.14. They've been in my for-linus
branch for a week or so, and I plan to ask Linus to pull them today.
Sorry I didn't make that more clear.
> I think more time in testing with either pci_enable_msix_range() or
> pci_enable_msix_exact() is good. And a follow-up switch from
> pci_enable_msix_range() to pci_enable_msix_exact() should be easy eigher.
>
> What do you think is the best course of action now?
You should be able to post patches that use pci_enable_msix_exact();
that's been in -next for a while now. Maybe include a cover note
saying what they depend on.
Bjorn
>> > + if (status < 0)
>> > goto Exit;
>> >
>> > for (i = 0; i < PCIE_PORT_DEVICE_MAXSERVICES; i++)
>> > @@ -159,21 +160,23 @@ static int pcie_port_enable_msix(struct pci_dev *dev, int *vectors, int mask)
>> > idx[PCIE_PORT_SERVICE_AER_SHIFT] = i;
>> > }
>> >
>> > + status = 0;
>> > +
>> > /*
>> > * If nvec is equal to the allocated number of entries, we can just use
>> > * what we have. Otherwise, the port has some extra entries not for the
>> > * services we know and we need to work around that.
>> > */
>> > - if (nvec == nr_entries) {
>> > - status = 0;
>> > - } else {
>> > + if (nvec != nr_entries) {
>> > /* Drop the temporary MSI-X setup */
>> > pci_disable_msix(dev);
>> >
>> > /* Now allocate the MSI-X vectors for real */
>> > - status = pci_enable_msix(dev, msix_entries, nvec);
>> > - if (status)
>> > + nvec = pci_enable_msix_range(dev, msix_entries, nvec, nvec);
>> > + if (nvec < 0) {
>> > + status = nvec;
>> > goto Exit;
>> > + }
>> > }
>> >
>> > for (i = 0; i < PCIE_PORT_DEVICE_MAXSERVICES; i++)
>> > --
>> > 1.7.7.6
>> >
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> --
> Regards,
> Alexander Gordeev
> agordeev@xxxxxxxxxx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
