Store the root port information in amd_pmc_probe() so that the
information can be used across multiple routines.
Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <[email protected]>
---
Changes in v2:
- Store the rdev info in amd_pmc_probe() as suggested by Hans.
drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
index 55f14bdfdbfd..502f37eaba1f 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
@@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct amd_pmc_dev {
u16 minor;
u16 rev;
struct device *dev;
+ struct pci_dev *rdev;
struct mutex lock; /* generic mutex lock */
#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
@@ -482,6 +483,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
return -ENODEV;
}
+ dev->rdev = rdev;
dev->cpu_id = rdev->device;
err = pci_write_config_dword(rdev, AMD_PMC_SMU_INDEX_ADDRESS, AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO);
if (err) {
@@ -512,7 +514,6 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
}
base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
- pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
dev->regbase = devm_ioremap(dev->dev, base_addr + AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_OFFSET,
@@ -546,6 +547,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
struct amd_pmc_dev *dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
amd_pmc_dbgfs_unregister(dev);
+ pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
mutex_destroy(&dev->lock);
return 0;
}
--
2.25.1
Hi,
On 10/21/21 11:29, Sanket Goswami wrote:
> Store the root port information in amd_pmc_probe() so that the
> information can be used across multiple routines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <[email protected]>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Store the rdev info in amd_pmc_probe() as suggested by Hans.
Thank you, but there are still some issues, see below.
> drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
> index 55f14bdfdbfd..502f37eaba1f 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct amd_pmc_dev {
> u16 minor;
> u16 rev;
> struct device *dev;
> + struct pci_dev *rdev;
> struct mutex lock; /* generic mutex lock */
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
> struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
> @@ -482,6 +483,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + dev->rdev = rdev;
> dev->cpu_id = rdev->device;
> err = pci_write_config_dword(rdev, AMD_PMC_SMU_INDEX_ADDRESS, AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO);
> if (err) {
> @@ -512,7 +514,6 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
>
> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
> - pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
The current code here actually reads:
pci_dev_put(rdev);
Note (rdev) not (dev->rdev). I don't know what you based this on, this is weird.
Also there are a bunch of error-exits from amd_pmc_probe() which not all
need a "pci_dev_put(rdev)" added to them before there "return ERROR;"
statement.
It would be best to add:
err_pci_dev_put:
pci_dev_put(rdev);
return err;
Add the end off the function (after the return 0;) and replace all
"return FOO" error-exits with:
err = <FOO>;
goto err_pci_dev_put;
}
Regards,
Hans
> base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
>
> dev->regbase = devm_ioremap(dev->dev, base_addr + AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_OFFSET,
> @@ -546,6 +547,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct amd_pmc_dev *dev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>
> amd_pmc_dbgfs_unregister(dev);
> + pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
> mutex_destroy(&dev->lock);
> return 0;
> }
>
Hi Hans,
On 21-Oct-21 23:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
> [CAUTION: External Email]
>
> Hi,
>
> On 10/21/21 11:29, Sanket Goswami wrote:
>> Store the root port information in amd_pmc_probe() so that the
>> information can be used across multiple routines.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Store the rdev info in amd_pmc_probe() as suggested by Hans.
>
> Thank you, but there are still some issues, see below.
>
>
>> drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c | 4 +++-
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>> index 55f14bdfdbfd..502f37eaba1f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct amd_pmc_dev {
>> u16 minor;
>> u16 rev;
>> struct device *dev;
>> + struct pci_dev *rdev;
>> struct mutex lock; /* generic mutex lock */
>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
>> struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
>> @@ -482,6 +483,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> + dev->rdev = rdev;
>> dev->cpu_id = rdev->device;
>> err = pci_write_config_dword(rdev, AMD_PMC_SMU_INDEX_ADDRESS, AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO);
>> if (err) {
>> @@ -512,7 +514,6 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> }
>>
>> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
>> - pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
>
> The current code here actually reads:
>
> pci_dev_put(rdev);
>
> Note (rdev) not (dev->rdev). I don't know what you based this on, this is weird.
rdev is already retrieved before doing this:
pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
i.e.
in amd_pmc_probe()
rdev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(0, 0, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0));
if (!rdev || !pci_match_id(pmc_pci_ids, rdev)) {
pci_dev_put(rdev);
return -ENODEV;
}
after this I am storing rdev in "dev->rdev"
i.e.
dev->rdev = rdev;
after this I am using "dev->rdev" at places where "rdev" was getting used earlier.
Do you see any problem?
>
> Also there are a bunch of error-exits from amd_pmc_probe() which not all
> need a "pci_dev_put(rdev)" added to them before there "return ERROR;"
> statement.
>
> It would be best to add:
>
> err_pci_dev_put:
> pci_dev_put(rdev);
> return err;
>
> Add the end off the function (after the return 0;) and replace all
> "return FOO" error-exits with:
>
> err = <FOO>;
> goto err_pci_dev_put;
> }
>
Thank you, will take it as a separate patch in v3.
Thanks,
Sanket
Hi Sanket,
On 10/22/21 08:55, Goswami, Sanket wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> On 21-Oct-21 23:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> [CAUTION: External Email]
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/21/21 11:29, Sanket Goswami wrote:
>>> Store the root port information in amd_pmc_probe() so that the
>>> information can be used across multiple routines.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - Store the rdev info in amd_pmc_probe() as suggested by Hans.
>>
>> Thank you, but there are still some issues, see below.
>>
>>
>>> drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c | 4 +++-
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>> index 55f14bdfdbfd..502f37eaba1f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct amd_pmc_dev {
>>> u16 minor;
>>> u16 rev;
>>> struct device *dev;
>>> + struct pci_dev *rdev;
>>> struct mutex lock; /* generic mutex lock */
>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
>>> struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
>>> @@ -482,6 +483,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> return -ENODEV;
>>> }
>>>
>>> + dev->rdev = rdev;
>>> dev->cpu_id = rdev->device;
>>> err = pci_write_config_dword(rdev, AMD_PMC_SMU_INDEX_ADDRESS, AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO);
>>> if (err) {
>>> @@ -512,7 +514,6 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> }
>>>
>>> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
>>> - pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
>>
>> The current code here actually reads:
>>
>> pci_dev_put(rdev);
>>
>> Note (rdev) not (dev->rdev). I don't know what you based this on, this is weird.
>
> rdev is already retrieved before doing this:
> pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
>
> i.e.
> in amd_pmc_probe()
>
> rdev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(0, 0, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0));
> if (!rdev || !pci_match_id(pmc_pci_ids, rdev)) {
> pci_dev_put(rdev);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> after this I am storing rdev in "dev->rdev"
> i.e.
> dev->rdev = rdev;
>
> after this I am using "dev->rdev" at places where "rdev" was getting used earlier.
> Do you see any problem?
What I was trying to say is that the patch does not apply, because it is
trying to remove the pci_put_dev() line from a block of code like this:
base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
But the actual code in platform-drivers-x86/review-hans (and for-next too) has:
base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
pci_dev_put(rdev);
base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
After your patch using dev->rdev instead of just rdev is fine
(but please be consistent, which would mean use just rdev everywhere).
But your patch is removing a line which does not exist in that form,
IOW it is based on some intermediate version of amd-pmc.c and not
on the HEAD of platform-drivers-x86/review-hans.
Regards,
Hans
>
>>
>> Also there are a bunch of error-exits from amd_pmc_probe() which not all
>> need a "pci_dev_put(rdev)" added to them before there "return ERROR;"
>> statement.
>>
>> It would be best to add:
>>
>> err_pci_dev_put:
>> pci_dev_put(rdev);
>> return err;
>>
>> Add the end off the function (after the return 0;) and replace all
>> "return FOO" error-exits with:
>>
>> err = <FOO>;
>> goto err_pci_dev_put;
>> }
>>
> Thank you, will take it as a separate patch in v3.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Sanket
>
Hi Hans,
On 22-Oct-21 14:21, Hans de Goede wrote:
> [CAUTION: External Email]
>
> Hi Sanket,
>
> On 10/22/21 08:55, Goswami, Sanket wrote:
>> Hi Hans,
>>
>> On 21-Oct-21 23:48, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> [CAUTION: External Email]
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 10/21/21 11:29, Sanket Goswami wrote:
>>>> Store the root port information in amd_pmc_probe() so that the
>>>> information can be used across multiple routines.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sanket Goswami <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>> - Store the rdev info in amd_pmc_probe() as suggested by Hans.
>>>
>>> Thank you, but there are still some issues, see below.
>>>
>>>
>>>> drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c | 4 +++-
>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>>> index 55f14bdfdbfd..502f37eaba1f 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd-pmc.c
>>>> @@ -119,6 +119,7 @@ struct amd_pmc_dev {
>>>> u16 minor;
>>>> u16 rev;
>>>> struct device *dev;
>>>> + struct pci_dev *rdev;
>>>> struct mutex lock; /* generic mutex lock */
>>>> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DEBUG_FS)
>>>> struct dentry *dbgfs_dir;
>>>> @@ -482,6 +483,7 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> return -ENODEV;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> + dev->rdev = rdev;
>>>> dev->cpu_id = rdev->device;
>>>> err = pci_write_config_dword(rdev, AMD_PMC_SMU_INDEX_ADDRESS, AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO);
>>>> if (err) {
>>>> @@ -512,7 +514,6 @@ static int amd_pmc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
>>>> - pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
>>>
>>> The current code here actually reads:
>>>
>>> pci_dev_put(rdev);
>>>
>>> Note (rdev) not (dev->rdev). I don't know what you based this on, this is weird.
>>
>> rdev is already retrieved before doing this:
>> pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
>>
>> i.e.
>> in amd_pmc_probe()
>>
>> rdev = pci_get_domain_bus_and_slot(0, 0, PCI_DEVFN(0, 0));
>> if (!rdev || !pci_match_id(pmc_pci_ids, rdev)) {
>> pci_dev_put(rdev);
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> after this I am storing rdev in "dev->rdev"
>> i.e.
>> dev->rdev = rdev;
>>
>> after this I am using "dev->rdev" at places where "rdev" was getting used earlier.
>> Do you see any problem?
>
> What I was trying to say is that the patch does not apply, because it is
> trying to remove the pci_put_dev() line from a block of code like this:
>
> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
> pci_dev_put(dev->rdev);
> base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
>
> But the actual code in platform-drivers-x86/review-hans (and for-next too) has:
>
> base_addr_hi = val & AMD_PMC_BASE_ADDR_LO_MASK;
> pci_dev_put(rdev);
> base_addr = ((u64)base_addr_hi << 32 | base_addr_lo);
>
>
>
> After your patch using dev->rdev instead of just rdev is fine
> (but please be consistent, which would mean use just rdev everywhere).
>
> But your patch is removing a line which does not exist in that form,
> IOW it is based on some intermediate version of amd-pmc.c and not
> on the HEAD of platform-drivers-x86/review-hans.
I will rebase it to review-hans branch and will respin a new version.
Thanks,
Sanket