linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI/P2PDMA: Fix a source code comment
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:32:15 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3dc57299-199f-4583-9b66-748a6aec059f@deltatee.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190815212821.120929-1-bvanassche@acm.org>



On 2019-08-15 3:28 p.m., Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Commit 52916982af48 ("PCI/P2PDMA: Support peer-to-peer memory"; v4.20)
> introduced the following text: "there's no way to determine whether the
> root complex supports forwarding between them." A later commit added a
> whitelist check in the function that comment applies to. Update the
> comment to reflect the addition of the whitelist check.

Thanks for the vigilant patch, but I've already got a series[1] that
cleans up most of these commits. It looks like this patch will conflict
with that series.

Logan

[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20190812173048.9186-1-logang@deltatee.com/

> Cc: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
> Cc: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/p2pdma.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> index 234476226529..f719adc2b826 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c
> @@ -300,8 +300,8 @@ static bool root_complex_whitelist(struct pci_dev *dev)
>   * Any two devices that don't have a common upstream bridge will return -1.
>   * In this way devices on separate PCIe root ports will be rejected, which
>   * is what we want for peer-to-peer seeing each PCIe root port defines a
> - * separate hierarchy domain and there's no way to determine whether the root
> - * complex supports forwarding between them.
> + * separate hierarchy domain and there's no way other than using a whitelist
> + * to determine whether the root complex supports forwarding between them.
>   *
>   * In the case where two devices are connected to different PCIe switches,
>   * this function will still return a positive distance as long as both
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-15 21:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-15 21:28 [PATCH] PCI/P2PDMA: Fix a source code comment Bart Van Assche
2019-08-15 21:32 ` Logan Gunthorpe [this message]
2019-08-15 22:41   ` Bart Van Assche

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=3dc57299-199f-4583-9b66-748a6aec059f@deltatee.com \
    --to=logang@deltatee.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.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).