From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:24428 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751811AbaEAUUH (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 May 2014 16:20:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 14:20:05 -0600 (MDT) From: Keith Busch To: Bjorn Helgaas cc: Keith Busch , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , linux-nvme Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] PCI: Device driver function reset notification In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1397000541-1085-1-git-send-email-keith.busch@intel.com> <20140430224637.GA31315@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 1 May 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Keith Busch wrote: >> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 08, 2014 at 05:42:20PM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: >>> You put the notify in these functions: >>> >>> pci_reset_function() >>> pci_try_reset_function() >>> >>> but what about these: >>> >>> pci_reset_slot() >>> pci_try_reset_slot() >>> pci_reset_bus() >>> pci_try_reset_bus() >> >> >> Good point. These all call pci_dev_save_and_disable at the start and >> pci_dev_restore after, so I think just adding the reset prepare/complete >> to those functions should cover all scenarios. Does this sound ok? > > Sound OK to me, as long as the save/restore functions aren't used elsewhere. Yep, there is currently 1:1 symmetry for these in all cases. I'll make a note for any future use that the calling disabling/restore should maintain this property.