On 15/01/26 06:08PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
On Fri,  9 Jan 2026 18:14:30 +0530
Neeraj Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:

In 84ec985944ef3, devm_cxl_add_nvdimm() sequence was changed and called
before devm_cxl_add_endpoint(). It's because cxl pmem region auto-assembly
used to get called at last in cxl_endpoint_port_probe(), which requires
cxl_nvd presence.

For cxl region persistency, region creation happens during nvdimm_probe
which need the completion of endpoint probe.

In order to accommodate both cxl pmem region auto-assembly and cxl region
persistency, refactored following

1. Re-Sequence devm_cxl_add_nvdimm() after devm_cxl_add_endpoint(). This
   will be called only after successful completion of endpoint probe.

2. Create cxl_region_discovery() which performs pmem region
   auto-assembly and remove cxl pmem region auto-assembly from
   cxl_endpoint_port_probe()

3. Register cxl_region_discovery() with devm_cxl_add_memdev() which gets
   called during cxl_pci_probe() in context of cxl_mem_probe()

4. As cxlmd->ops->probe() calls registered cxl_region_discovery(), so
   move devm_cxl_add_nvdimm() before cxlmd->ops->probe(). It guarantees
   both the completion of endpoint probe and cxl_nvd presence before
   calling cxlmd->ops->probe().

Reviewed-by: Dave Jiang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Neeraj Kumar <[email protected]>

One thing below. With that fixes,
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <[email protected]>

Thanks Jonathan for RB tag



diff --git a/drivers/cxl/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/pci.c
index e21051d79b25..d56fdfe4b43b 100644
--- a/drivers/cxl/pci.c
+++ b/drivers/cxl/pci.c
@@ -907,6 +907,7 @@ static int cxl_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct 
pci_device_id *id)
        struct cxl_memdev_state *mds;
        struct cxl_dev_state *cxlds;
        struct cxl_register_map map;
+       struct cxl_memdev_ops ops;

Needs init, as there might be other stuff in there.
        struct cxl_memdev_ops ops = {};

Now cxl_memdev_ops is changed with cxl_memdev_attach.
I have initialized it accordingly.


Regards,
Neeraj


Reply via email to