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;
Date:   Mon, 1 Feb 2021 17:09:17 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
cc:     Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
        Chris Browy <cbrowy@avery-design.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
        Jon Masters <jcm@jonmasters.org>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
        daniel.lll@alibaba-inc.com,
        "John Groves (jgroves)" <jgroves@micron.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] cxl/mem: Find device capabilities
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4jRVDdZyqH_eL4jjRvbCOEpO_UMUZdXbtevsY6PpcRq4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <26a3b4dc-8872-3547-33f7-20cbd6cd981d@google.com>
References: <32f33dd-97a-8b1c-d488-e5198a3d7748@google.com> <20210201215857.ud5cpg7hbxj2j5bx@intel.com> <b46ed01-3f1-6643-d371-7764c3bde4f8@google.com> <20210201222859.lzw3gvxuqebukvr6@intel.com> <20210201223314.qh24uxd7ajdppgfl@intel.com>
 <f86149f8-3aea-9d8c-caa9-62771bf22cb5@google.com> <20210201225052.vrrvuxrsgmddjzbb@intel.com> <79b98f60-151b-6c80-65c3-91a37699d121@google.com> <20210201231718.2hwaqgn2f7kc7usw@intel.com> <a789317e-2ac2-10a1-dedd-1851972e3d6b@google.com>
 <20210202001120.vr6mos7ylnbqytxh@intel.com> <CAPcyv4jRVDdZyqH_eL4jjRvbCOEpO_UMUZdXbtevsY6PpcRq4Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Dan Williams wrote:

> > > I don't have an objection to binding, but doesn't this require that the
> > > check in cxl_validate_cmd_from_user() guarantees send_cmd->size_in cannot
> > > be greater than 1MB?
> >
> > You're correct. I'd need to add:
> > cxlm->mbox.payload_size =
> >     min_t(size_t, 1 << CXL_GET_FIELD(cap, CXLDEV_MB_CAP_PAYLOAD_SIZE), 1<<20)
> 
> nit, use the existing SZ_1M define.
> 

Sounds good, thanks both!  I'll assume you'll follow-up on this in the 
next revision for patch 7 ("cxl/mem: Add send command") and we can 
consider this resolved :)