From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E1F9C169C4 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:15:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B49E2175B for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:15:09 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9B49E2175B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43pZSV5ywJzDqLv for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:15:06 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=vaibhav@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43pZQl2KGpzDqKy for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 16:13:34 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x0T5ATWJ027815 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:13:32 -0500 Received: from e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.98]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2qagb88g7g-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:13:31 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:29 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp02.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.132) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:28 -0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id x0T5DQ1H1704372 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:26 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95901AE051; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB80AE04D; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from vajain21.in.ibm.com (unknown [9.109.223.28]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with SMTP; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 05:13:23 +0000 (GMT) Received: by vajain21.in.ibm.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:43:23 +0530 From: Vaibhav Jain To: christophe lombard , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Frederic Barrat Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] powerpc/powernv: Add support for CXL mode switch that need PHB reset In-Reply-To: References: <20190125051131.29351-1-vaibhav@linux.ibm.com> <20190125051131.29351-2-vaibhav@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:43:23 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 19012905-0008-0000-0000-000002B744CB X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 19012905-0009-0000-0000-0000222385DA Message-Id: <87womo9hcc.fsf@vajain21.in.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-01-29_04:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=986 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1901290038 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Philippe Bergheaud , Alastair D'Silva , Christophe Lombard , Andrew Donnellan Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Thanks for reviewing this patch Christophe, christophe lombard writes: >> >> pe = pnv_ioda_get_pe(dev); >> if (!pe) >> - return -ENODEV; >> + return -ENOENT; > > The return code of pnv_phb_to_cxl_mode() is also returned by an api in > the cxllib librarie. So, hoping that nobody test the value !! Agreed. I did peek into cxllib_switch_phb_mode() before sending the patch and saw two conflicting cases. While switching to CXL_MODE_PCI we make sure that we return kernel error codes and while switching to CXL_MODE_CXL we return OPAL error codes. I havent seen how CX5 handles return values from this function but I am betting thats its the usual zero & non-zero return value check, which then should work with the proposed change. -- Vaibhav Jain Linux Technology Center, IBM India Pvt. Ltd.