From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)" <u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
Basavaraj Natikar <Basavaraj.Natikar@amd.com>,
Frank Li <Frank.Li@kernel.org>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>,
dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Frank Li <Frank.Li@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dmaengine: Consistently define pci_device_ids using named initializers
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2026 16:39:44 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ansmIBcCdXlkOS4W@ashevche-desk.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <148354eaf657c30428c678baaef07b2ff9888c00.1784547700.git.u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com>
On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 02:03:49PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub) wrote:
> The .driver_data member of the various struct pci_device_id arrays were
> initialized by list expressions. This isn't easily readable if you're
> not into PCI. Using named initializers is more explicit and thus easier
> to parse.
>
> While touching these arrays, unify the list terminators to be just an
> empty struct with no trailing comma.
>
> This change doesn't introduce changes to the compiled pci_device_id
> arrays, which was confirmed using x86 and arm64 builds.
...
> +++ b/drivers/dma/dw-edma/dw-edma-pcie.c
> static const struct pci_device_id dw_edma_pcie_id_table[] = {
> { PCI_DEVICE_DATA(SYNOPSYS, EDDA, &snps_edda_data) },
> { PCI_VDEVICE(XILINX, PCI_DEVICE_ID_XILINX_B054),
> - (kernel_ulong_t)&xilinx_mdb_data },
> + .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&xilinx_mdb_data },
> { PCI_VDEVICE(XILINX, PCI_DEVICE_ID_XILINX_B00F),
> .driver_data = (kernel_ulong_t)&xilinx_cpm6_dma_data },
It's inconsistent and can use PCI_DEVICE_DATA() in all cases.
> { }
...
> +++ b/drivers/dma/pch_dma.c
> static const struct pci_device_id pch_dma_id_table[] = {
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_EG20T_PCH_DMA_8CH), 8 },
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_EG20T_PCH_DMA_4CH), 4 },
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA1_8CH), 8}, /* UART Video */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA2_8CH), 8}, /* PCMIF SPI */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA3_4CH), 4}, /* FPGA */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA4_12CH), 12}, /* I2S */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA1_4CH), 4}, /* UART */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA2_4CH), 4}, /* Video SPI */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA3_4CH), 4}, /* Security */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA4_4CH), 4}, /* FPGA */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7831_DMA1_8CH), 8}, /* UART */
> - { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7831_DMA2_4CH), 4}, /* SPI */
> - { 0, },
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_EG20T_PCH_DMA_8CH), .driver_data = 8 },
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_EG20T_PCH_DMA_4CH), .driver_data = 4 },
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA1_8CH), .driver_data = 8 }, /* UART Video */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA2_8CH), .driver_data = 8 }, /* PCMIF SPI */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA3_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* FPGA */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7213_DMA4_12CH), .driver_data = 12 }, /* I2S */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA1_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* UART */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA2_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* Video SPI */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA3_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* Security */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7223_DMA4_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* FPGA */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7831_DMA1_8CH), .driver_data = 8 }, /* UART */
> + { PCI_VDEVICE(ROHM, PCI_DEVICE_ID_ML7831_DMA2_4CH), .driver_data = 4 }, /* SPI */
> + { }
> };
And I'm still strongly against this churn, which also makes lines too long.
PCI_DEVICE_DATA() makes it condensed and moves the burden of any future
conversions to the macro without touching users again.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-11 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 12:03 [PATCH v3 0/2] dmaengine: Use named initializers for arrays of pci_device_id Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)
2026-07-20 12:03 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] dmaengine: hsu: Drop unused pci driver data Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)
2026-07-20 12:03 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] dmaengine: Consistently define pci_device_ids using named initializers Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)
2026-08-11 13:39 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2026-08-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] dmaengine: Use named initializers for arrays of pci_device_id Andy Shevchenko
2026-08-11 14:43 ` Uwe Kleine-König (The Capable Hub)
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=ansmIBcCdXlkOS4W@ashevche-desk.local \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=Basavaraj.Natikar@amd.com \
--cc=Frank.Li@kernel.org \
--cc=Frank.Li@nxp.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@baylibre.com \
--cc=vireshk@kernel.org \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.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.