Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v18 05/11] PCI/ERR: Remove service dependency in pcie_do_recovery() | From | "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <> | Date | Sat, 28 Mar 2020 14:55:50 -0700 |
| |
Hi Bjorn,
On 3/28/20 2:32 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 02:12:48PM -0700, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote: >> On 3/23/20 5:26 PM, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com wrote: >>> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> >>> >> >>> +void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, >>> + enum pci_channel_state state, >>> + pci_ers_result_t (*reset_link)(struct pci_dev *pdev)) >>> { >>> pci_ers_result_t status = PCI_ERS_RESULT_CAN_RECOVER; >>> struct pci_bus *bus; >>> @@ -206,9 +165,12 @@ void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, enum pci_channel_state state, >>> pci_dbg(dev, "broadcast error_detected message\n"); >>> if (state == pci_channel_io_frozen) { >>> pci_walk_bus(bus, report_frozen_detected, &status); >>> - status = reset_link(dev, service); >>> - if if (reset_link) >> status = reset_link(dev);(status == PCI_ERS_RESULT_DISCONNECT >>> + status = reset_link(dev); >> Above line needs to be replaced as below. Since there is a >> possibility reset_link can NULL (eventhough currently its >> not true). >> if (reset_link) >> status = reset_link(dev); >> Shall I submit another version to add above fix on top of >> our pci/edr branch ? > > No, I can squash that in if needed. > > But I don't actually think we *do* need it. All the callers supply a > valid reset_link function pointer, and if somebody changes or adds a > new one that doesn't, I'd rather take the null pointer exception and > find out about it than silently ignore it. But the documentation says "If reset_link is not NULL, recovery function will use it to reset the link." It considers NULL as a possible case. So I think its better to allow that case with a pci_warn() message. > > Bjorn >
|  |