[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v5 13/18] pci: introduce pci_find_the_only_child()
From: |
Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v5 13/18] pci: introduce pci_find_the_only_child() |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Mar 2023 11:45:00 +0300 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 |
On 02.03.23 11:37, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Mar 02, 2023 at 11:28:44AM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
On 02.03.23 00:09, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 09:03:51PM +0300, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote:
To be used in further patch to identify the device hot-plugged into
pcie-root-port.
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy<vsementsov@yandex-team.ru>
Reviewed-by: Anton Kuchin<antonkuchin@yandex-team.ru>
Wait a second does this work for multifunction devices correctly?
I thought about that and I'm just lost:)
Could several (multifunction?) devices be plugged into one pcie-root-port
device?
One device per port but one multifunction device is represented as multiple
PCIDevice structures.
So, it should be OK to send _one_ event for that multifunction device, and the code is
shpc_reset() is OK, but reporting "Several child devices found" is bad idea?
So, if I change the logic from pci_find_the_only_child() to
pci_find_first_child() is it OK?
Same question for SHPC slots. For example, shpc_free_devices_in_slot() looks
like we can have several devices in one slot..
On the other hand, in shpc_reset() we have construction
shpc->sec_bus->devices[PCI_DEVFN(SHPC_IDX_TO_PCI(i), 0)] to access the device
in slot. The only one device.
--
Best regards,
Vladimir
Same thing.
... and let's not get started about sriov and ari ...
--
Best regards,
Vladimir