From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0b-0016f401.pphosted.com (mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com [67.231.148.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C8D1E7484; Thu, 27 Jun 2024 05:20:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=67.231.148.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719465637; cv=none; b=UHHxd3bnIgo0l2vLCSnr3tE9NIQuMouOJb9wmP2yo4/CsEy+vNYGgPmq8kMlSZn+HpM2guBQjtuQP71438vyPjwn+IkayhVRwDqt/BkQ71o+103peB7CWJaJ5atc7j3YU9KhDpYiNW4jKVMzUkBxYDaPrK5klw0oNHDtjvscWDc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719465637; c=relaxed/simple; bh=D/X5YwfUNyF7H8xkH0w9pwN7YRo+9twFtmwa8F4Hhg0=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ub7FgNPsKjGtj8BYIUS+HSdkubunIWkd/vJwqkQZ4T+6Mmvy8qKzMZRL/E9gINYkaqTHOI9Hjyq2bxDBd9vZSvTlLJWBKa71T5s1SNr1fMcDZ45EpI2R/ku+J9sDK9oDsgsXh5lbzrK+J4oninqi3IuPX0QpZgL38votSiUiK3U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=marvell.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=marvell.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=marvell.com header.i=@marvell.com header.b=LwqoMyqp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=67.231.148.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=marvell.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=marvell.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=marvell.com header.i=@marvell.com header.b="LwqoMyqp" Received: from pps.filterd (m0045849.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 45R2vmk8001296; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 22:20:29 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=marvell.com; h= cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to; s=pfpt0220; bh=LujTv9Un+e7Gfkpm+Ek8qW0Qp TfwdpmhopdaziKnrX4=; b=LwqoMyqpYtgfnDf7zErvT3WqglLHvvKIVDUxuD05U iov1Jh7X49TpRS3S30Ped/OmV8Sg6JjjjkTEA5zQwywqhXWf0UCyZ1juo2XPegTQ HYlmrLf5vcEGaEg7NeybRqJ3X/iyJDaIDmxCFAgxtdQseZXpzmaEwTNdkg+ovv1b UFl5oU7kHyKeVKbOUvKNv6pOPpt+7xutOmNwpMIGseM2Y1gbWF+mKtn3J7Mjm8VC vleyOTrodoEa178u50pQaKp0iQKjMtFLm+i/4dNMGPSVkc5WNKQ1bdxa65hQy+qz Aay8org0vIhte2i4Xs2VJ+gxFQ77bMFp2JzKn3ItiwqSw== Received: from dc5-exch05.marvell.com ([199.233.59.128]) by mx0a-0016f401.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 400yrt0bxm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 26 Jun 2024 22:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DC5-EXCH05.marvell.com (10.69.176.209) by DC5-EXCH05.marvell.com (10.69.176.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.4; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 22:20:28 -0700 Received: from maili.marvell.com (10.69.176.80) by DC5-EXCH05.marvell.com (10.69.176.209) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.2.1544.4 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 22:20:28 -0700 Received: from maili.marvell.com (unknown [10.28.36.165]) by maili.marvell.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 700623F7071; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 22:20:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:50:23 +0530 From: Ratheesh Kannoth To: Ma Ke CC: , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] s390/ism: Add check for dma_set_max_seg_size in ism_probe() Message-ID: <20240627052023.GB1743080@maili.marvell.com> References: <20240627021314.2976443-1-make24@iscas.ac.cn> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240627021314.2976443-1-make24@iscas.ac.cn> X-Proofpoint-GUID: 1RgVgEIe1BgXqTi3lr5xIeuaM-kYjrZ3 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 1RgVgEIe1BgXqTi3lr5xIeuaM-kYjrZ3 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1039,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.28.16 definitions=2024-06-27_02,2024-06-25_01,2024-05-17_01 On 2024-06-27 at 07:43:14, Ma Ke (make24@iscas.ac.cn) wrote: > As the possible failure of the dma_set_max_seg_size(), we should better Could you expand on the scenario of failure ? > check the return value of the dma_set_max_seg_size(). > +++ b/drivers/s390/net/ism_drv.c > @@ -620,7 +620,10 @@ static int ism_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) > goto err_resource; > > dma_set_seg_boundary(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M - 1); > - dma_set_max_seg_size(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M); > + ret = dma_set_max_seg_size(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M); Same error check is not valid for dma_set_seg_boundary() ? >