Re: [PATCH 2/8] PCI: Add pci_find_common_upstream_dev()

[Christian KÃnig]

Am 28.03.2018 um 17:47 schrieb Logan Gunthorpe:
> On 28/03/18 09:07 AM, Christian KÃnig wrote:
> > Am 28.03.2018 um 14:38 schrieb Christoph Hellwig:
> > > On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 12:59:54PM +0200, Christian KÃnig wrote:
> > > > From: "wdavis@xxxxxxxxxx" <wdavis@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Add an interface to find the first device which is upstream of both
> > > > devices.
> > > Please work with Logan and base this on top of the outstanding peer
> > > to peer patchset.
> > Can you point me to that? The last code I could find about that was from
> > 2015.
> The latest posted series is here:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/12/830
>
> However, we've made some significant changes to the area that's similar
> to what you are doing. You can find lasted un-posted here:
>
> https://github.com/sbates130272/linux-p2pmem/tree/pci-p2p-v4-pre2
>
> Specifically this function would be of interest to you:
>
> https://github.com/sbates130272/linux-p2pmem/blob/0e9468ae2a5a5198513dd12990151e09105f0351/drivers/pci/p2pdma.c#L239
>
> However, the difference between what we are doing is that we are
> interested in the distance through the common upstream device and you
> appear to be finding the actual common device.

Yeah, that looks very similar to what I picked up from the older 
patches, going to read up on that after my vacation.

Just in general why are you interested in the "distance" of the devices?

And BTW: At least for writes that Peer 2 Peer transactions between 
different root complexes work is actually more common than the other way 
around.

So I'm a bit torn between using a blacklist or a whitelist. A whitelist 
is certainly more conservative approach, but that could get a bit long.

Thanks,
Christian.

> Thanks,
>
> Logan