From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Hookable IO operations
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 09:32:01 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1162593121.10630.132.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200611032320.34762.arnd@arndb.de>
> I think it would be helpful to not generate the function name itself,
> but pass it down to the macro, so you grep for the definition, either
>
> DEF_MMIO_IN_BE(in_be16, u16, lwz)
>
> or going further, making it look more like a declaration
>
> static inline u16 DEF_MMIO_IN_BE(in_be16, u16, lwz)
>
> which may even do the right thing with ctags (need to check that)
I'll look into it.
> > +/*
> > + * IO stream instructions are defined out of line
> > + */
> > +extern void _insb(volatile u8 __iomem *port, void *buf, long count);
> > +extern void _outsb(volatile u8 __iomem *port, const void *buf, long count);
> > +extern void _insw_ns(volatile u16 __iomem *port, void *buf, long count);
> > +extern void _outsw_ns(volatile u16 __iomem *port, const void *buf, long count);
> > +extern void _insl_ns(volatile u32 __iomem *port, void *buf, long count);
> > +extern void _outsl_ns(volatile u32 __iomem *port, const void *buf, long count);
>
> If you leave out the 'extern', it fits into a normal line ;-)
Did I change them from the initial definition ? Anyway, I dislike
prototypes in headers without "extern".
>
> similarly here, you could write these using slightly different macros
> as
>
> DEF_PCI_AC_OUT_MMIO(writeb, u8)
> DEF_PCI_AC_OUT_PIO(outb, u8)
> DEF_PCI_AC_OUT_MMIO(writew, u16)
> DEF_PCI_AC_OUT_PIO(outw, u16)
I'll look at it.
> > +
> > +/* We still use EEH versions for now. Ultimately, we might just get rid of
> > + * EEH in here and use it as a set of __memset_io etc... hooks
> > + */
>
> Yes, I fully agree. The definition of eeh_memset_io and the others
> looks like they really want to be out-of-line.
Yes.
> > +
> > +extern void (*__memset_io)(volatile void __iomem *addr, int c,
> > + unsigned long n);
> > +extern void (*__memcpy_fromio)(void *dest, const volatile void __iomem *src,
> > + unsigned long n);
> > +extern void (*__memcpy_toio)(volatile void __iomem *dest, const void *src,
> > + unsigned long n);
>
> Why are these all separate symbols? Wouldn't it be clearer to group them
> in ppc_md, or a similar structure of function pointers?
Because the IO ones are separate already and I want to keep things
consistent with them.
> This is the point where it gets completely unreadable. I ended up
> running the macros through 'gcc -E' to see what they do ;-)
Come on ... :-) They are almost the same as the ones in the .h, they
just only define the function pointer.
> If you resolve all the macros, you actually get fewer lines, and
> it suddenly becomes readable, as well as parsable with grep and ctags:
>
> u8 (*__ind_readb) (const volatile void __iomem * addr);
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__ind_readb);
> u8 (*__ind_inb) (unsigned long port);
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__ind_inb);
> u16 (*__ind_readw) (const volatile void __iomem * addr);
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__ind_readw);
> u16 (*__ind_inw) (unsigned long port);
> ...
>
> I do the same when I start using macros, it's always hard to know exactly
> when to stop ;-)
I'll look and see what the result looks like.
> > -static u8 iSeries_Read_Byte(const volatile void __iomem *IoAddress)
> > +static u8 iseries_readb(const volatile void __iomem *IoAddress)
>
> Since you're converting iSeries_Read_Byte from SilLycAps, shouldn't
> you change IoAddress to something more sensible at the same time?
No, I'm only changing the prototype & name to better match my hooks,
further cleanups of the content of these functions is something I'll do
in a separate patch.
> > {
> > u64 BarOffset;
> > u64 dsa;
> > @@ -462,7 +411,8 @@ static u8 iSeries_Read_Byte(const volati
> > num_printed = 0;
> > }
> > if (num_printed++ < 10)
> > - printk(KERN_ERR "iSeries_Read_Byte: invalid access at IO address %p\n", IoAddress);
> > + printk(KERN_ERR "iSeries_Read_Byte: invalid access at IO address %p\n",
> > + IoAddress);
> > return 0xff;
>
> And the name in the comment should also be changed.
Ooopsa.
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-03 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-03 21:12 [PATCH/RFC] Hookable IO operations Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-11-03 22:20 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-11-03 22:32 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2006-11-03 22:48 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-11-03 22:56 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-11-04 0:15 ` Arnd Bergmann
2006-11-04 1:06 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-11-04 16:28 ` Segher Boessenkool
2006-11-04 22:05 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2006-11-04 22:33 ` Segher Boessenkool
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1162593121.10630.132.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.