Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] PCI/MSI: Check msi_addr_mask in msi_verify_entries()

Vivian Wang <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.sophgo,org.freedesktop.lists.amd-gfx,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-pci,org.kernel.vger.linux-sound,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 1/22/26 07:38, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Thomas, thread at https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]]
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 11:49:38AM +0800, Vivian Wang wrote:
>> Instead of a 32-bit/64-bit dichotomy, check the MSI address against
>> msi_addr_mask.
>>
>> This allows platforms with MSI doorbell above 32-bit address space to
>> work with devices without full 64-bit MSI address support, as long as
>> the doorbell is within addressable range of MSI of the device.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vivian Wang <[email protected]>
>>
>> ---
>> v2: No changes
>> ---
>>  drivers/pci/msi/msi.c | 9 ++++++---
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c b/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
>> index 48f5f03d1479..2ecbcd6c436a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/msi/msi.c
>> @@ -321,14 +321,17 @@ static int msi_setup_msi_desc(struct pci_dev *dev, int nvec,
>>  static int msi_verify_entries(struct pci_dev *dev)
>>  {
>>  	struct msi_desc *entry;
>> +	u64 address;
>>  
>>  	if (dev->msi_addr_mask == DMA_BIT_MASK(64))
>>  		return 0;
>>  
>>  	msi_for_each_desc(entry, &dev->dev, MSI_DESC_ALL) {
>> -		if (entry->msg.address_hi) {
>> -			pci_err(dev, "arch assigned 64-bit MSI address %#x%08x but device only supports 32 bits\n",
>> -				entry->msg.address_hi, entry->msg.address_lo);
>> +		address = (u64)entry->msg.address_hi << 32 |
>> +			  entry->msg.address_lo;
>> +		if (address & ~dev->msi_addr_mask) {
>> +			pci_err(dev, "arch assigned 64-bit MSI address %llx above device MSI address mask %llx\n",
> Use %#llx so it's clear these addresses are hex.  The previous message
> did that, not sure why you dropped it.

Thanks for catching. I misunderstood the purpose of the original message
formatting.

I will fix this in v3.

Vivian "dramforever" Wang
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.