Thanks for reviewing this patch Fred,

Frederic Barrat [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

  
  		afu_result = cxl_vphb_error_detected(afu, state);
  
-		cxl_context_detach_all(afu);
-		cxl_ops->afu_deactivate_mode(afu, afu->current_mode);
-		pci_deconfigure_afu(afu);
+		if (afu != NULL) {
+			cxl_context_detach_all(afu);
+			cxl_ops->afu_deactivate_mode(afu, afu->current_mode);
+			pci_deconfigure_afu(afu);
+		}

I can see you're also checking if cxl_vphb_error_detected() is called 
with a NULL afu from within the function, but why not move the call to 
cxl_vphb_error_detected() within that "if (afu != NULL)...  " statement? 
Otherwise, it looks suspicious when reading the code.

Yes, agree. However this was triggerring gcc compile warning
'maybe-uninitialized' for 'afu_result', hence removed the call to
cxl_vphb_error_detected() outside the branch. Have fixed this in v2 with
an explicit initialization of 'afu_result'.

quoted

@@ -2051,10 +2067,11 @@ static void cxl_pci_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
  	 * This is not the place to be checking if everything came back up
  	 * properly, because there's no return value: do that in slot_reset.
  	 */
+	spin_lock(&adapter->afu_list_lock);
  	for (i = 0; i < adapter->slices; i++) {
  		afu = adapter->afu[i];
  
-		if (afu->phb == NULL)
+		if (afu || afu->phb == NULL)
  			continue;

if (afu == NULL ...

Thanks for catching this. Have fixed this in v2.
-- 
Vaibhav Jain [off-list ref]
Linux Technology Center, IBM India Pvt. Ltd.