Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
To:     Piotr Stankiewicz <piotr.stankiewicz@intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Jian-Hong Pan <jian-hong@endlessm.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200603114212.12525-1-piotr.stankiewicz@intel.com>
 <20200603114425.12734-1-piotr.stankiewicz@intel.com>
From:   Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Message-ID: <3bc1522b-33ba-04ee-4d8e-e4a31ec50756@deltatee.com>
Date:   Wed, 3 Jun 2020 09:48:26 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200603114425.12734-1-piotr.stankiewicz@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/15] PCI/MSI: Forward MSI-X vector enable error code
 in pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity()
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 2020-06-03 5:44 a.m., Piotr Stankiewicz wrote:
> When debugging an issue where I was asking the PCI machinery to enable a
> set of MSI-X vectors, without falling back on MSI, I ran across a
> behaviour which seems odd. The pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity() will
> always return -ENOSPC on failure, when allocating MSI-X vectors only,
> whereas with MSI fallback it will forward any error returned by
> __pci_enable_msi_range(). This is a confusing behaviour, so have the
> pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity() forward the error code from
> __pci_enable_msix_range() when appropriate.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <piotr.stankiewicz@intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/msi.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> index 6b43a5455c7a..443cc324b196 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/msi.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi.c
> @@ -1231,8 +1231,9 @@ int pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity(struct pci_dev *dev, unsigned int min_vecs,
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	if (msix_vecs == -ENOSPC)
> -		return -ENOSPC;
> +	if (msix_vecs == -ENOSPC ||
> +	    (flags & (PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX)) == PCI_IRQ_MSIX)
> +		return msix_vecs;
>  	return msi_vecs;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity);
> 

It occurs to me that we could clean this function up a bit more... I
don't see any need to have two variables for msi_vecs and msix_vecs and
then have a complicated bit of logic at the end to decide which to return.

Why not instead just have one variable which is set by
__pci_enable_msix_range(), then __pci_enable_msi_range(), then returned
if they both fail?

Logan