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=-7.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 A0F7DC2D0E2 for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 21:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A5982371F for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 21:08:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600808900; bh=BDZqDbEsDos24AuogLq7FSNVZYR47oBmsuzshIlUfoY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=10UDjzwHYDFwFrkLzif7mLRp2+pxRFlNtWOO7XOKhirJDSPVRhNknYY7ZG7j7xc6r VMReoQRlxDtYxOGGK/6yJncraqdB/N2Axw6ktpMetFTg6uzS0C/48iP+hGHD/xU57j PoxBBub3n4+jax4lCdMHAIOTrpWltAazZN/tn88k= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726607AbgIVVIN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:08:13 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:55016 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726576AbgIVVIN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:08:13 -0400 Received: from localhost (lfbn-ncy-1-588-162.w81-51.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.51.203.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8491C206FB; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 21:08:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1600808893; bh=BDZqDbEsDos24AuogLq7FSNVZYR47oBmsuzshIlUfoY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=EJ7AU/9yLn2smE8LGi1p6MwmLz1Z8pLjt/9D1MCsE2JEL2NHFq1kZb6+f5ZxgTJR6 +Hgz1vS9G0NoT1pVAXtV/jfMVXLPrA+aa6SuyGzWP1nkAFsW7R1MEoej+nC/xlikNE 1VEMgNeGEMeYqGEDP8kb3PmWOUslrUdPkfQuWHZQ= Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 23:08:10 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Nitesh Narayan Lal Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , bhelgaas@google.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, sassmann@redhat.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, jacob.e.keller@intel.com, jlelli@redhat.com, hch@infradead.org, mike.marciniszyn@intel.com, dennis.dalessandro@intel.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, jerinj@marvell.com, mathias.nyman@intel.com, jiri@nvidia.com Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch v1 3/3] PCI: Limit pci_alloc_irq_vectors as per housekeeping CPUs Message-ID: <20200922210809.GE5217@lenoir> References: <20200909150818.313699-1-nitesh@redhat.com> <20200909150818.313699-4-nitesh@redhat.com> <20200910192208.GA24845@fuller.cnet> <75a398cd-2050-e298-d718-eb56d4910133@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <75a398cd-2050-e298-d718-eb56d4910133@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 09:54:58AM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote: > >> If min_vecs > num_housekeeping, for example: > >> > >> /* PCI MSI/MSIx support */ > >> #define XGBE_MSI_BASE_COUNT 4 > >> #define XGBE_MSI_MIN_COUNT (XGBE_MSI_BASE_COUNT + 1) > >> > >> Then the protection fails. > > Right, I was ignoring that case. > > > >> How about reducing max_vecs down to min_vecs, if min_vecs > > >> num_housekeeping ? > > Yes, I think this makes sense. > > I will wait a bit to see if anyone else has any other comment and will post > > the next version then. > > > > Are there any other comments/concerns on this patch that I need to address in > the next posting? No objection from me, I don't know much about this area anyway. > -- > Nitesh >