On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 07:18:36 +0000 "Tian, Kevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > From: Leon Romanovsky <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 5:58 PM > > > > From: Leon Romanovsky <[email protected]> > > not required with only your own s-o-b > > > @@ -2090,6 +2092,9 @@ int vfio_pci_core_init_dev(struct vfio_device > > *core_vdev) > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vdev->dummy_resources_list); > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vdev->ioeventfds_list); > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&vdev->sriov_pfs_item); > > + ret = pcim_p2pdma_init(vdev->pdev); > > + if (ret && ret != -EOPNOTSUPP) > > + return ret; > > Reading the commit msg seems -EOPNOTSUPP is only returned for fake > PCI devices, otherwise it implies regression. better add a comment for it? I think the commit log is saying that if a device comes along that can't support this, we'd quirk the init path to return -EOPNOTSUPP for that particular device here. This path is currently used when !CONFIG_PCI_P2PDMA to make this error non-fatal to the device init. I don't see a regression if such a device comes along and while we could survive other types of failures by disabling p2pdma here, I think all such cases are sufficient rare out of memory cases to consider them catastrophic. Thanks, Alex
