Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANXvt5qjx6gXhBZD3ndBPCxx++i2oxd5X7=MRgUGrXUj4kRgfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220706030812.GA109866@bhelgaas>
In-Reply-To: <20220706030812.GA109866@bhelgaas>
From:   Shunsuke Mie <mie@igel.co.jp>
Date:   Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:15:38 +0900
Message-ID: <CANXvt5rn3NdV63c6-22UqxBpxCNeSdog6Sr+SiZjt7K5pkKbLw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: endpoint: Don't stop EP controller by EP function
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Hou Zhiqiang <Zhiqiang.Hou@nxp.com>,
        Li Chen <lchen@ambarella.com>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

2022=E5=B9=B47=E6=9C=886=E6=97=A5(=E6=B0=B4) 12:08 Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@k=
ernel.org>:
>
> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 11:37:29AM +0900, Shunsuke Mie wrote:
> > 2022=E5=B9=B47=E6=9C=886=E6=97=A5(=E6=B0=B4) 7:40 Bjorn Helgaas <helgaa=
s@kernel.org>:
> > > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 01:09:24PM +0900, Shunsuke Mie wrote:
> > > > For multi-function endpoint device, an ep function shouldn't stop E=
P
> > > > controller. Nomally the controller is stopped via configfs.
> > >
> > > Can you please clarify this for me?
> > >
> > > An endpoint function by itself wouldn't stop an endpoint controller.
> > > I assume that some *operation* on an endpoint function currently stop=
s
> > > the endpoint controller, but that operation should not stop the
> > > controller?
> > >
> > > I guess the operation is an "unbind" that detaches an EPF device from
> > > an EPC device?
> >
> > It is likely that after all of the endpoint functions are unbound, the
> > controller can be stopped safely, but I'm not sure if it is desired beh=
avior
> > for endpoint framework.
>
> I'm not asking about the patch itself.  I'm asking about the commit
> log because "an EP function shouldn't stop EP controller" doesn't
> quite make sense in English.
I'm sorry.

> I suspect it should say something like "unbinding one endpoint
> function of a multi-function device from the endpoint controller
> should not stop the controller."
Yes, it is correct and represents the commit clearly.

> But I don't know enough about EPF/EPC binding to know whether that
> makes sense either.
>
> > Kishon, could you please comment?
> >
> > > > Fixes: 349e7a85b25f ("PCI: endpoint: functions: Add an EP function =
to test PCI")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Shunsuke Mie <mie@igel.co.jp>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c | 1 -
> > > >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c b/driver=
s/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c
> > > > index 5b833f00e980..a5ed779b0a51 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/endpoint/functions/pci-epf-test.c
> > > > @@ -627,7 +627,6 @@ static void pci_epf_test_unbind(struct pci_epf =
*epf)
> > > >
> > > >       cancel_delayed_work(&epf_test->cmd_handler);
> > > >       pci_epf_test_clean_dma_chan(epf_test);
> > > > -     pci_epc_stop(epc);
> > > >       for (bar =3D 0; bar < PCI_STD_NUM_BARS; bar++) {
> > > >               epf_bar =3D &epf->bar[bar];
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > 2.17.1
> > > >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shunsuke