From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org> To: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ashok.raj@intel.com, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 10/11] PCI/DPC: Add Error Disconnect Recover (EDR) support Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:36:37 -0500 Message-ID: <20200326223637.GA106135@google.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <f71c989b-b8f8-3437-b086-a97c2aa1e2c5@linux.intel.com> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 06:00:31PM -0700, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote: > Hi Bjorn, > > On 3/24/20 2:37 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > This is really ugly. What's the story on this firmware? It sounds > > defective to me. > > I think there is no defined standard for this. I have checked few > _DSM implementations. Some of them return default value and some > don't. But atleast in the test hardware I use, we need this check. I agree that I don't see anything in the ACPI spec v6.3 about what should happen if we supply a Function Index that isn't supported. That looks like a hole in the spec. > > Or is everybody that uses _DSM supposed to check before evaluating it? > > I think its safer to do this check. > > > E.g., > > > > if (!acpi_check_dsm(...)) > > return -EINVAL; > > > > obj = acpi_evaluate_dsm(...); > > > > If everybody is supposed to do this, it seems like the check part > > should be moved into acpi_evaluate_dsm(). So my question, and I guess this is really for Rafael, is that since it seems like *everybody* needs to use acpi_check_dsm() in order to use acpi_evaluate_dsm() safely, why don't we move the check *into* acpi_evaluate_dsm()? It's just error prone if we expect everybody to call both interfaces. Bjorn
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-03-24 0:25 [PATCH v18 00/11] " sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:25 ` [PATCH v18 01/11] PCI/ERR: Update error status after reset_link() sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:25 ` [PATCH v18 02/11] PCI: move {pciehp,shpchp}_is_native() definitions to pci.c sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 03/11] PCI/DPC: Fix DPC recovery issue in non hotplug case sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 23:49 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-25 1:17 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-28 17:10 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-28 22:04 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-28 22:21 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-28 22:40 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 04/11] PCI/DPC: Move DPC data into struct pci_dev sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 05/11] PCI/ERR: Remove service dependency in pcie_do_recovery() sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-28 21:12 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-28 21:32 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-28 21:55 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-28 22:16 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 06/11] PCI/ERR: Return status of pcie_do_recovery() sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 07/11] PCI/DPC: Cache DPC capabilities in pci_init_capabilities() sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 08/11] PCI/AER: Add pci_aer_raw_clear_status() to unconditionally clear Error Status sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 09/11] PCI/DPC: Expose dpc_process_error(), dpc_reset_link() for use by EDR sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 10/11] PCI/DPC: Add Error Disconnect Recover (EDR) support sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-24 21:37 ` Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-25 1:00 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan 2020-03-26 22:36 ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message] 2020-03-24 0:26 ` [PATCH v18 11/11] PCI/AER: Rationalize error status register clearing sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy 2020-03-31 15:28 ` [PATCH v18 00/11] Add Error Disconnect Recover (EDR) support Bjorn Helgaas 2020-03-31 16:28 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
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=20200326223637.GA106135@google.com \ --to=helgaas@kernel.org \ --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \ --cc=lenb@kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \ --cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \ /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
Linux-PCI Archive on lore.kernel.org Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/0 linux-pci/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 linux-pci linux-pci/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci \ linux-pci@vger.kernel.org public-inbox-index linux-pci Example config snippet for mirrors Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.linux-pci AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git