[+cc Alex] On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 05:36:48PM -0400, Sinan Kaya wrote: > The return codes from various reset types are not consistent. The code is > assuming that all reset types will return -ENOTTY when things go wrong. > Instead of relying on negative error status, let's bail out if the > operation is successful instead. I like this (no surprise since I suggested something similar at http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171011210057.GU25517@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx), but I'd like Alex's opinion before merging it. Previously, we only tried the next reset method if one method failed with -ENOTTY. With this patch, we'll try the next reset method if one method fails for any reason, not just -ENOTTY. > Signed-off-by: Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/pci/pci.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci.c b/drivers/pci/pci.c > index 6078dfc..a753e07 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/pci.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/pci.c > @@ -4200,20 +4200,20 @@ int __pci_reset_function_locked(struct pci_dev *dev) > might_sleep(); > > rc = pci_dev_specific_reset(dev, 0); > - if (rc != -ENOTTY) > + if (!rc) > return rc; > if (pcie_has_flr(dev)) { > pcie_flr(dev); > return 0; > } > rc = pci_af_flr(dev, 0); > - if (rc != -ENOTTY) > + if (!rc) > return rc; > rc = pci_pm_reset(dev, 0); > - if (rc != -ENOTTY) > + if (!rc) > return rc; > rc = pci_dev_reset_slot_function(dev, 0); > - if (rc != -ENOTTY) > + if (!rc) > return rc; > return pci_parent_bus_reset(dev, 0); > } > -- > 1.9.1 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
