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:   Thu, 27 May 2021 14:05:31 +0200
From:   Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>
To:     Om Prakash Singh <omp@nvidia.com>
Cc:     vidyas@nvidia.com, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
        thierry.reding@gmail.com, jonathanh@nvidia.com,
        linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kthota@nvidia.com,
        mmaddireddy@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH V1 4/5] PCI: tegra: Don't allow suspend when Tegra
 PCIe is in EP mode
Message-ID: <20210527120531.GB213718@rocinante.localdomain>
References: <20210527115246.20509-1-omp@nvidia.com>
 <20210527115246.20509-5-omp@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210527115246.20509-5-omp@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Prakash

[...]
> @@ -2276,6 +2276,11 @@ static int tegra_pcie_dw_suspend_late(struct device *dev)
[...]
> +	if (pcie->mode == DW_PCIE_EP_TYPE) {
> +		dev_err(dev, "Tegra PCIe is in EP mode, suspend not allowed");
> +		return -EPERM;
> +	}

Would the -EINVAL be more appropriate here?  It seem more appropriate
when something is an invalid operation, rather than access to the
resource being denied (or something along these lines), what do you
think?

	Krzysztof