From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sudeep.holla@arm.com (Sudeep Holla) Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 14:21:24 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v5 4/9] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables In-Reply-To: References: <20171201222330.18863-1-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <20171201222330.18863-5-jeremy.linton@arm.com> <2078459.JrYtfXc8fv@aspire.rjw.lan> <5024a041-2ef4-3912-994f-b5fcc945e916@arm.com> <9bb1c58a-8d48-9952-e292-60b2bcb87a51@arm.com> Message-ID: <3c3bf8a4-a13a-ce71-4bd2-71dd11b45521@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org (Sorry for the delay, just returning from vacation) On 12/12/17 23:37, Jeremy Linton wrote: > On 12/12/2017 05:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: [...] >> >> So call this field "token" or similar.? Don't call it "of_node" and >> don't introduce another "firmware_node" thing in addition to that. >> That just is a mess, sorry. I completely agree. Both me and Lorenzo pointed that out in previous revisions and fair enough you have a valid concern it's use with PPTT. > > I sort of agree, I think I can just change the whole of_node to a > generic 'void *firmware_unique' which works fine for the PPTT code, it > should also work for the DT code in cache_leaves_are_shared(). > Should be fine. > The slight gocha is there is a bit of DT code which initially runs > earlier that uses of_node as an indirect parameter to a couple functions > (by just passing the cacheinfo). Let me see if I can tweak that a bit. > May be use a simple inline wrapper functions to convert, might help if we diverge too. > Frankly, If I understood completely all the *priv cases I suspect it > might be possible to collapse *of_node into that as well. That is as > long as no one decides to flush out DT on x86, or PPTT on x86. > priv is used to save architecture/cache specific details that can't be generalized. I doubt if this of_node or PPTT pointer/offset falls in that category. -- Regards, Sudeep