Re: [PATCH v2] cxl/port: Fix endpoint RAS error unmasking

["Cheatham, Benjamin" <benjamin.cheatham@amd.com>]

On 11/3/2026 12:34 AM, Richard Cheng wrote:
> Moving endpoint RAS handling from cxl_pci to cxl_port left
> cxl_ras_unmask() checking whether port->uport_dev is a PCI device.
> Endpoint ports always use a cxl_memdev as uport_dev, so this check
> returns early and leaves the CXL RAS error masks unchanged.
> 
> Resolve the PCI device directly through the memdev's parent. Rename
> helper to cxl_endpoint_ras_unmask() and its param to endpoint to make
> its endpoint-only scope explicit.
> 
> Fixes: dab7162d0ae7 ("cxl/port: Move endpoint component register management to cxl_port")
> Signed-off-by: Richard Cheng <icheng@nvidia.com>
> ---

...

> -static int cxl_ras_unmask(struct cxl_port *port)
> +static int cxl_endpoint_ras_unmask(struct cxl_port *endpoint)
>  {
> +	struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd = to_cxl_memdev(endpoint->uport_dev);
> +	struct device *parent = cxlmd->dev.parent;

Two small nits:

1. Maybe just use endpoint->uport_dev.parent directly and drop the cxlmd part? It's less
readable, but it's future proofing for when/if CXL.cache devices come along.

2. I don't think you need to rename the port parameter if you change the name to endpoint. It's
self-explanatory at that point and cuts down on the diff.

Both are really up to you on whether you think they're worthwhile, and the change makes sense as-is,
so regardless of whether you implement the above:

Reviewed-by: Ben Cheatham <benjamin.cheatham@amd.com>

Thanks,
Ben