On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 08:55:22PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: ...
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoem...@hpe.com> wrote: > > + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) > > + dsm_mask = nd_desc->bus_dsm_mask; > > desc = nd_cmd_bus_desc(cmd); > > uuid = to_nfit_uuid(NFIT_DEV_BUS); > > handle = adev->handle; > > @@ -1613,6 +1615,7 @@ static void acpi_nfit_init_dsms(struct acpi_nfit_desc > > *acpi_desc) > > struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor *nd_desc = &acpi_desc->nd_desc; > > const u8 *uuid = to_nfit_uuid(NFIT_DEV_BUS); > > struct acpi_device *adev; > > + unsigned long dsm_mask; > > int i; > > > > nd_desc->cmd_mask = acpi_desc->bus_cmd_force_en; > > @@ -1624,6 +1627,11 @@ static void acpi_nfit_init_dsms(struct > > acpi_nfit_desc *acpi_desc) > > if (acpi_check_dsm(adev->handle, uuid, 1, 1ULL << i)) > > set_bit(i, &nd_desc->cmd_mask); > > set_bit(ND_CMD_CALL, &nd_desc->cmd_mask); > > + > > + dsm_mask = 0x3bf; > > I went ahead and fixed this up to use dsm_mask defined like this: > > + dsm_mask = > + (1 << ND_CMD_ARS_CAP) | > + (1 << ND_CMD_ARS_START) | > + (1 << ND_CMD_ARS_STATUS) | > + (1 << ND_CMD_CLEAR_ERROR) | > + (1 << NFIT_CMD_TRANSLATE_SPA) | > + (1 << NFIT_CMD_ARS_INJECT_SET) | > + (1 << NFIT_CMD_ARS_INJECT_CLEAR) | > + (1 << NFIT_CMD_ARS_INJECT_GET); > > This drops function number 0 which userspace has no need to call. Actually I like to call function 0. Its an excellent test when modifying the code path as its a no side effects function whose output is known in advance and instantly recognizable. I also use it when testing new firmware. What is the downside to allowing it? What bad things happen? Also, I do have to ask why you allow function zero for NVDIMM_FAMILY_MSFT? -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jerry Hoemann Software Engineer Hewlett Packard Enterprise -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
