Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] PCI/aer_inject: Convert inject_lock to raw_spinlock_t

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 01:08:22PM +0000, Guangbo Cui wrote:

> > +	scoped_guard (raw_spinlock_irqsave, &inject_lock) {
> > +		if (ops == &aer_inj_pci_ops)
> > +			break;
> > +		pci_bus_ops_init(bus_ops, bus, ops);
> > +		list_add(&bus_ops->list, &pci_bus_ops_list);
> > +		bus_ops = NULL;
> > +	}
> 
> I found that there are two styles of calling scoped_guard in the kernel:
> 
>   1. scoped_guard (...)
> 
>   2. scoped_guard(...)
> 
> Is there any coding convention or guideline regarding this?

Not really :/ I usually use the former, to mirror if (cond) and for
(;;) usage as opposed to func(args). 

> > +				rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_COR_RCV;
> > +			rperr->source_id &= 0xffff0000;
> > +			rperr->source_id |= PCI_DEVID(einj->bus, devfn);
> > +		}
> > +		if (einj->uncor_status) {
> > +			if (rperr->root_status & PCI_ERR_ROOT_UNCOR_RCV)
> > +				rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_MULTI_UNCOR_RCV;
> > +			if (sever & einj->uncor_status) {
> > +				rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_FATAL_RCV;
> > +				if (!(rperr->root_status & PCI_ERR_ROOT_UNCOR_RCV))
> > +					rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_FIRST_FATAL;
> > +			} else
> > +				rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_NONFATAL_RCV;
> > +			rperr->root_status |= PCI_ERR_ROOT_UNCOR_RCV;
> > +			rperr->source_id &= 0x0000ffff;
> > +			rperr->source_id |= PCI_DEVID(einj->bus, devfn) << 16;
> > +		}
> >  	}
> > -	raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&inject_lock, flags);
> >  
> >  	if (aer_mask_override) {
> >  		pci_write_config_dword(dev, pos_cap_err + PCI_ERR_COR_MASK,
> 
> LGTM, If there are no objections, I’ll include these two patches in the
> next version of the patchset and add your Signed-off-by tag.

Sure, but please do test them, I've not even had them near a compiler
;-)

Thanks!