On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 2:38 PM Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> wrote: > > > > On 20/11/2019 12:28, Oliver O'Halloran wrote: > > After resetting a VF we call eeh_restore_vf_config() to restore several > > registers in the VFs config space. For physical functions this is normally > > handled by the pci_reinit_device() OPAL call which requests firmware to > > re-program the device with whatever defaults were set at boot time. We > > can't use that for VFs since OPAL (being firmware) doesn't know (or care) > > about VFs. > > > > However, the fields that are restored here are all marked as reserved for > > VFs in the SR-IOV spec. In other words, eeh_restore_vf_config() doesn't > > actually do anything. > > > > There is an argument to be made that we should be saving and restoring > > some of these fields since they are marked as "Reserved, but Preserve" > > (ResvP) to allow these fields to be used in new versions of the SR-IOV. > > However, the current code doesn't even do that properly since it assumes > > they can be set to whatever the EEH core has assumed to be correct. If > > the fields *are* used in future versions of the SR-IOV spec this code > > is still broken since it doesn't take into account any changes made > > by the driver, or the Linux IOV core. > > Given the above, just delete the code. It's broken, it's mis-leading, > > and it's getting in the way of doing useful cleanups. > > > There is still a prototype for this in arch/powerpc/include/asm/eeh.h, > and pci_dn::mps as well. > > > With the history of this explained offline, > > Reviewed-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru>
The commit message used to have some of the background, but I thought it was too long already and took it out. I'll add it back in I guess.
