Re: [PATCH V3 0/2] pci: Provide a flag to access VPD through function 0

["Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1467 bytes --]

> On Jun 3, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Mark D Rustad <mark.d.rustad@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Many multi-function devices provide shared registers in extended
> config space for accessing VPD. The behavior of these registers
> means that the state must be tracked and access locked correctly
> for accesses not to hang or worse. One way to meet these needs is
> to always perform the accesses through function 0, thereby using
> the state tracking and mutex that already exists.
> 
> To provide this behavior, add a dev_flags bit to indicate that this
> should be done. This bit can then be set for any non-zero function
> that needs to redirect such VPD access to function 0. Do not set
> this bit on the zero function or there will be an infinite recursion.
> 
> The second patch uses this new flag to invoke this behavior on all
> multi-function Intel Ethernet devices.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rustad <mark.d.rustad@intel.com>
> 
> ---
> Changes in V2:
> - Corrected a spelling error in a log message
> - Added checks to see that the referenced function 0 is reasonable
> Changes in V3:
> - Don't leak a device reference
> - Check that function 0 has VPD
> - Make a helper for the function 0 checks
> - Moved a multifunction check to the quirk patch

So does this series look acceptable now? I think I addressed the issues that Alex raised. Can these also be considered for -stable?

--
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation


[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 841 bytes --]