From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Woods, Brian" <Brian.Woods@amd.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
Clemens Ladisch <clemens@ladisch.de>,
Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.com>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>,
Jia Zhang <qianyue.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86/amd_nb: add support for newer PCI topologies
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 22:42:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181105214233.GF26868@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181105203330.GB27399@amd.com>
On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:33:34PM +0000, Woods, Brian wrote:
> I think having them togeter is cleaner. If you aren't finding any
> misc IDs, I highly doubt you'll find any root IDs. There shouldn't
> be much of a difference in how fast the function exits, either way.
> If you want it the other way though, I don't mind changing it.
Yes please. Because this is the usual kernel coding style of calling a
function (or a loop which has some result in this case) and testing that
result immediately after the function call.
> Would
>
> /*
> * If there are more PCI root devices than data fabric/
> * system management network interfaces, then the (N)
> * PCI roots per DF/SMN interface are functionally the
> * same (for DF/SMN access) and N-1 are redundant. The
> * N-1 PCI roots should be skipped per DF/SMN interface
> * so the DF/SMN interfaces get mapped to the correct
> * PCI root.
You say "correct" as there is a special one. But the text before it says
they're "functionally the same" wrt DF/SMN access so it sounds to me
like we wanna map the first one we find and ignore the others.
I.e., we wanna say
"... so the DF/SMN interfaces get mapped to the *first* PCI root and the
others N-1 ignored."
Or am I misreading this?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-05 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-02 18:11 [PATCH 0/4] Update DF/SMN access and k10temp for AMD F17h M30h Woods, Brian
2018-11-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] k10temp: x86/amd_nb: consolidate shared device IDs Woods, Brian
2018-11-02 18:24 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-11-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/amd_nb: add support for newer PCI topologies Woods, Brian
2018-11-02 19:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-02 23:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-05 21:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-05 21:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-06 21:42 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-06 22:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-06 23:20 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 9:18 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-07 13:38 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 16:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-07 17:10 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 17:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-07 19:50 ` Woods, Brian
2018-11-07 13:51 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-11-07 17:16 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 19:15 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2018-11-07 21:31 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 22:42 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2018-11-07 23:14 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-07 23:30 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2018-11-07 23:44 ` Srinivas Pandruvada
2018-11-08 1:40 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-11-08 13:59 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2018-11-05 19:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-05 20:33 ` Woods, Brian
2018-11-05 21:42 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2018-11-05 23:32 ` Woods, Brian
2018-11-06 8:27 ` Borislav Petkov
2018-11-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] x86/amd_nb: add PCI device IDs for F17h M30h Woods, Brian
2018-11-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 4/4] hwmon: k10temp: add support for AMD F17h M30h CPUs Woods, Brian
2018-11-02 18:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-11-05 20:32 ` Borislav Petkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20181105214233.GF26868@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=Brian.Woods@amd.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=clemens@ladisch.de \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jdelvare@suse.com \
--cc=linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=puwen@hygon.cn \
--cc=qianyue.zj@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).