From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from 8bytes.org ([85.214.48.195]:35425 "EHLO mail.8bytes.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756318Ab3FTQPn (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:15:43 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.8bytes.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6BC7112B0EE for ; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:15:41 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:15:38 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: Alex Williamson Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, ddutile@redhat.com, Bjorn Helgaas Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iommu: Quirked PCIe bridge test and search function Message-ID: <20130620161538.GH3589@8bytes.org> References: <20130528183527.3318.5365.stgit@bling.home> <20130528184020.3318.7800.stgit@bling.home> <20130620135914.GS2575@8bytes.org> <1371743091.32709.52.camel@ul30vt.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1371743091.32709.52.camel@ul30vt.home> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 09:44:51AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 15:59 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:40:20PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > + if (!pci_is_root_bus(pdev->bus)) { > > > + struct pci_dev *parent = pdev->bus->self; > > > + > > > + if (pci_is_pcie(parent) && > > > + pci_pcie_type(parent) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_PCI_BRIDGE) > > > + return true; > > > + } > > > > Hmm, that looks a bit dangerous. > > How so? The algorithm seems pretty simple and logical. It is simple, but it is still a heuristic that may fail at some point, no? > Actually, I believe Bjorn rejected the idea of a fixed list because this > problem is detectable. He also doesn't want me messing with quirks to > pci_is_pcie() in PCI because he wants a 1:1 relation between that and > having a PCIe capability. So, I'm stuck and this is where it's ended > up. Thanks, I think implementing such a list is much safer. Bjorn, why didn't you like that idea? Joerg From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Joerg Roedel Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iommu: Quirked PCIe bridge test and search function Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 18:15:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20130620161538.GH3589@8bytes.org> References: <20130528183527.3318.5365.stgit@bling.home> <20130528184020.3318.7800.stgit@bling.home> <20130620135914.GS2575@8bytes.org> <1371743091.32709.52.camel@ul30vt.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1371743091.32709.52.camel-85EaTFmN5p//9pzu0YdTqQ@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: Alex Williamson Cc: linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, stephen-OTpzqLSitTUnbdJkjeBofR2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org, iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org, Bjorn Helgaas , dwmw2-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org List-Id: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 09:44:51AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 15:59 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 12:40:20PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > + if (!pci_is_root_bus(pdev->bus)) { > > > + struct pci_dev *parent = pdev->bus->self; > > > + > > > + if (pci_is_pcie(parent) && > > > + pci_pcie_type(parent) != PCI_EXP_TYPE_PCI_BRIDGE) > > > + return true; > > > + } > > > > Hmm, that looks a bit dangerous. > > How so? The algorithm seems pretty simple and logical. It is simple, but it is still a heuristic that may fail at some point, no? > Actually, I believe Bjorn rejected the idea of a fixed list because this > problem is detectable. He also doesn't want me messing with quirks to > pci_is_pcie() in PCI because he wants a 1:1 relation between that and > having a PCIe capability. So, I'm stuck and this is where it's ended > up. Thanks, I think implementing such a list is much safer. Bjorn, why didn't you like that idea? Joerg