Re: [PATCH] pci: Use a bus-global mutex to protect VPD operations

2015-05-27 Thread Rustad, Mark D
> On May 27, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > It sounds like there are real problems here that would be fixed by changing > the mutex strategy and limiting VPD read lengths, but that we don't quite > have consensus on how to solve them yet. I have a new pair of patches that I am getti

Re: [PATCH] pci: Use a bus-global mutex to protect VPD operations

2015-05-27 Thread Bjorn Helgaas
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 05:00:37PM -0700, Mark D Rustad wrote: > Some devices have a problem with concurrent VPD access to different > functions of the same physical device, so move the protecting mutex > from the pci_vpd structure to the pci_bus structure. There are a > number of reports on suppor

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] pci: Use a bus-global mutex to protect VPD operations

2015-05-20 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 05/20/2015 09:00 AM, Rustad, Mark D wrote: On May 19, 2015, at 6:02 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: My suspicion is that we have a number of bugs floating around out there like the Broadcom issue. Specifically, one of the ones I found was that the r8169 seems to have a similar issue as called

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] pci: Use a bus-global mutex to protect VPD operations

2015-05-20 Thread Rustad, Mark D
> On May 19, 2015, at 6:02 PM, Alexander Duyck > wrote: > > My suspicion is that we have a number of bugs floating around out there like > the Broadcom issue. Specifically, one of the ones I found was that the r8169 > seems to have a similar issue as called out in the email thread at > http:

Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] pci: Use a bus-global mutex to protect VPD operations

2015-05-19 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 05/18/2015 05:00 PM, Mark D Rustad wrote: Some devices have a problem with concurrent VPD access to different functions of the same physical device, so move the protecting mutex from the pci_vpd structure to the pci_bus structure. There are a number of reports on support sites for a variety