Hi Kishon,
On 14/01/2019 13:24, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> commit beb4641a787df79a ("PCI: dwc: Add MSI-X callbacks handler") while
> adding MSI-X callback handler, introduced dw_pcie_ep_find_capability and
> __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap for finding the MSI and MSIX capability.
>
> However if MSI or MSIX capability is the last capability (i.e there are
> no additional items in the capabilities list and the Next Capability
> Pointer is set to '0'), __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap will return '0'
> even though MSI or MSIX capability may be present. This is because of
> incorrect ordering of "next_cap_ptr" check. Fix it here.
>
> Fixes: beb4641a787df79a142 ("PCI: dwc: Add MSI-X callbacks handler")
> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kis...@ti.com>
> ---
> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c | 10 +++++-----
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> index d5144781005b..cd51b008858c 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-designware-ep.c
> @@ -46,16 +46,19 @@ static u8 __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(struct dw_pcie *pci,
> u8 cap_ptr,
> u8 cap_id, next_cap_ptr;
> u16 reg;
>
> + if (!cap_ptr)
> + return 0;
> +
Supposedly this was already verified by the function that calls this one.
> reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, cap_ptr);
> - next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0xff00) >> 8;
> cap_id = (reg & 0x00ff);
>
> - if (!next_cap_ptr || cap_id > PCI_CAP_ID_MAX)
> + if (cap_id > PCI_CAP_ID_MAX)
> return 0;
>
> if (cap_id == cap)
> return cap_ptr;
>
> + next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0xff00) >> 8;
This fix seems to be a bit overdone, especially when you only need to swap the
if blocks order to achieve the desired goal.
> return __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
> }
>
> @@ -67,9 +70,6 @@ static u8 dw_pcie_ep_find_capability(struct dw_pcie *pci,
> u8 cap)
> reg = dw_pcie_readw_dbi(pci, PCI_CAPABILITY_LIST);
> next_cap_ptr = (reg & 0x00ff);
>
> - if (!next_cap_ptr)
> - return 0;
> -
Why remove it?
If pointer is null, why to jump to another function to check is the the same
pointer is null?
> return __dw_pcie_ep_find_next_cap(pci, next_cap_ptr, cap);
> }
>
>
