Received: by 10.213.65.68 with SMTP id h4csp1346649imn; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 03:04:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4/RWBcpPFQqKiWD1XHPXKPpBaJwXPjCl78Ni8Sn64cIcXQYJLNU4e6+LGryGo02EfjR0ml2 X-Received: by 10.99.100.68 with SMTP id y65mr5120504pgb.257.1522317882413; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 03:04:42 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1522317882; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=HkLC7zpg2cWvleOe+4A4S4PZlJDazjNbwfoeFXXZPKIUdy97HEn0N+UkV+XhF4akH3 81tHyqfJ7b72TeZ2snnilHkETRe2qZ7ESYEAtSQF8fxIadywiK5DEwgjvB+QKhW4TVU+ JnRlw+LeZdACfPSPQS/8nK/HTzBRWeTD+rthSf79vSqY+W7HMXViRaEbkfHh2k5RsyKC C0E7E/ytLa5liKjwj6GeHRcDKdB9qgCFrlPeqmUfNmRmWQROfZd/vUq6zu/pjPTPZMqT lzQTZOIoNHRd8LJyXJwQLHJmt0inaeYg5GrZRkiP/ZVRSOmX2w8hN0+s6B3/6SPKhb2Y JJSQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:cc:references:to :subject:dkim-signature:arc-authentication-results; bh=vPRNCJdX8eKYGXBPdSeiPF8O5WabDWNVONWzGAqIQDw=; b=GGBNoGaiandWALZt/kiLitN0tAaBvVipOZRa3AwsHh75xgzrMREbPP+cvLVSj594Cw L98yYPpCu+3ut7aqHfqJ9P2SBEK+gXycAkAAOvHsdcZaVu92m/3UU/mNiji53yCwRKu6 L5ypFkjTYjbNm+SLvMUOl9V6qW6rBfMaXCPBpXHVS2J9RgMy919UKjkTnhEPMBANMamd cSjSKeP0Tm5auyskyRLb0C17BSgPkk3qi00DecM2O0cjtxRAR3yJ0V17bcloX6wdeuy5 PnDt8VgzYl46RZ025XN9o3Mer3iR2JvSp5e97js8B0p5f7thplVEUO+yMGF+fOqLjon+ V8pQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=cr0i4J3r; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ti.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v5si4205017pfb.179.2018.03.29.03.04.28; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 03:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ti.com header.s=ti-com-17Q1 header.b=cr0i4J3r; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=QUARANTINE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ti.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752679AbeC2KDK (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 29 Mar 2018 06:03:10 -0400 Received: from fllnx209.ext.ti.com ([198.47.19.16]:44751 "EHLO fllnx209.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752497AbeC2KDI (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2018 06:03:08 -0400 Received: from dflxv15.itg.ti.com ([128.247.5.124]) by fllnx209.ext.ti.com (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTP id w2TA2xES031124; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:02:59 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1522317779; bh=9EZQO9METmfiM9vSZqFq2tbGorHe1boCwcPumAzSWPE=; h=Subject:To:References:CC:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=cr0i4J3ruuIiofhdg7IIv/Mxv5/tKP50VG1PBibVrNT5o1DiDvXeM266yrlducjOq /FikgQSFyhviAFCeRN5Y5v3ccjIBXlxohelf+qynmaT+0on58Tf7bgrPZljwdsAhQ9 nGPsZ/tsltuVO1p1ld2uFCW24cDukTdUCVS0e8QY= Received: from DLEE105.ent.ti.com (dlee105.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.35]) by dflxv15.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w2TA2xQ0013375; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:02:59 -0500 Received: from DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) by DLEE105.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1261.35; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:02:58 -0500 Received: from dlep33.itg.ti.com (157.170.170.75) by DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1261.35 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:02:58 -0500 Received: from [172.24.190.233] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by dlep33.itg.ti.com (8.14.3/8.13.8) with ESMTP id w2TA2tJo006468; Thu, 29 Mar 2018 05:02:56 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/12] PCI: endpoint: Make sure that BAR_5 does not have 64-bit flag set when clearing To: Niklas Cassel , , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Bjorn Helgaas References: <20180328115018.31921-1-niklas.cassel@axis.com> <20180328115018.31921-11-niklas.cassel@axis.com> CC: Niklas Cassel , , From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 15:32:55 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180328115018.31921-11-niklas.cassel@axis.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 28 March 2018 05:20 PM, Niklas Cassel wrote: > Since a 64-bit BAR consists of a BAR pair, and since there is no > BAR after BAR_5, BAR_5 cannot be 64-bits wide. > > This sanity check is done in pci_epc_clear_bar(), so that we don't need > to do this sanity check in all epc->ops->clear_bar() implementations. > > Signed-off-by: Niklas Cassel Acked-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I > --- > Kishon made a review comment that he wanted this: > https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=152161168226203 > > Personally, I don't think that this check is needed, > since pci_epc_set_bar() already does this check, > and no one should modify the flags after pci_epc_set_bar() > has been called. > > If everyone agrees, then this patch could be dropped. > > drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c > index eccc942043cb..b0ee42739c3c 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/pci-epc-core.c > @@ -285,7 +285,9 @@ void pci_epc_clear_bar(struct pci_epc *epc, u8 func_no, > { > unsigned long flags; > > - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions) > + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(epc) || func_no >= epc->max_functions || > + (epf_bar->barno == BAR_5 && > + epf_bar->flags & PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_MEM_TYPE_64)) > return; > > if (!epc->ops->clear_bar) >