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;
Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.112.34 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.112.34; helo=mail.nvidia.com;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: dwc: Add support for vendor specific capability
 search
To:     =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=c5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        Shradha Todi <shradha.t@samsung.com>
CC:     <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <jingoohan1@gmail.com>, <gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com>,
        <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>, <robh@kernel.org>,
        <bhelgaas@google.com>, <pankaj.dubey@samsung.com>,
        <p.rajanbabu@samsung.com>, <hari.tv@samsung.com>,
        <niyas.ahmed@samsung.com>, <l.mehra@samsung.com>
References: <20210518174618.42089-1-shradha.t@samsung.com>
 <CGME20210518173819epcas5p1ea10c2748b4bb0687184ff04a7a76796@epcas5p1.samsung.com>
 <20210518174618.42089-2-shradha.t@samsung.com>
 <20210521233100.GB79835@rocinante.localdomain>
From:   Vidya Sagar <vidyas@nvidia.com>
Message-ID: <0e6f5671-1d24-c43f-828a-4002562ec4ef@nvidia.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 May 2021 17:19:02 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210521233100.GB79835@rocinante.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 May 2021 11:49:10.3066
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 2976e525-4513-4928-eb17-08d921057102
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.112.34];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DM6NAM11FT024.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM5PR1201MB0092
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


On 5/22/2021 5:01 AM, Krzysztof Wilczyński wrote:
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
> 
> 
> Hi Shradha,
> 
> [...]
>> +u16 dw_pcie_find_vsec_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci, u8 vsec_cap)
>> +{
>> +     u16 vsec = 0;
>> +     u32 header;
>> +
>> +     while ((vsec = dw_pcie_find_next_ext_capability(pci, vsec,
>> +                                     PCI_EXT_CAP_ID_VNDR))) {
>> +             header = dw_pcie_readl_dbi(pci, vsec + PCI_VNDR_HEADER);
>> +             if (PCI_VNDR_HEADER_ID(header) == vsec_cap)
>> +                     return vsec;
>> +     }
>> +
>> +     return 0;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dw_pcie_find_vsec_capability);
> 
> A small question as I am curious: why not use pci_find_vsec_capability()
> here?  The implementation looks very similar, which is why I am asking,
> but it might be that I am missing something, and for that I apologise in
> advance.
pci_find_vsec_capability() expects struct pci_dev * which we get only 
after enumeration is done. In the current scenario, we are still in 
pre-link up phase and don't have struct pci_dev * yet, hence this 
implementation, right Shradha??

> 
>          Krzysztof
>