From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: zajec5@gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?=)
Date: Sat, 7 May 2011 20:05:24 +0200
Subject: [PATCH][WAS:bcmai,
	axi] bcma: add Broadcom specific AMBA bus driver
In-Reply-To: <1304790665.13983.10.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua>
References: <1304632783-8781-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com>
	<201105061605.31625.arnd@arndb.de>
	<BANLkTikjr0ZTNOu69F+iKhwufE9KKMg4Tg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimGBNT4FkS4mO9ToLWft0bCEYcEgg@mail.gmail.com>
	<1304790665.13983.10.camel@dev.znau.edu.ua>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikLFff_86Fvg+jSty9vGLENiELF2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

2011/5/7 George Kashperko <george@znau.edu.ua>:
>
>> 2011/5/6 Rafa? Mi?ecki <zajec5@gmail.com>:
>> > 2011/5/6 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>:
>> >>> +const char *bcma_device_name(u16 coreid)
>> >>> +{
>> >>> + ? ? switch (coreid) {
>> >>> + ? ? case BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER:
>> >>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? return "OOB Router";
>> >>> + ? ? case BCMA_CORE_INVALID:
>> >>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? return "Invalid";
>> >>> + ? ? case BCMA_CORE_CHIPCOMMON:
>> >>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? return "ChipCommon";
>> >>> + ? ? case BCMA_CORE_ILINE20:
>> >>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? return "ILine 20";
>> >>
>> >> It's better to make that a data structure than a switch() statement,
>> >> both from readability and efficiency aspects.
>> >
>> > Well, maybe. We call it only once, at init time. In any case we're
>> > still waiting for Broadcom to clarify which cores are really used for
>> > BCMA.
>>
>> Arnd: did you have a look at defines at all?
>>
>> Most of the defines have values in range 0x800 ? 0x837. Converting
>> this to array means loosing 0x800 u16 entries. We can not use 0x800
>> offset, because there are also some defined between 0x000 and 0x800:
>> #define BCMA_CORE_OOB_ROUTER ? ? ? ? ? 0x367 ? /* Out of band */
>> #define BCMA_CORE_INVALID ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0x700
>>
>> Oh and there is still:
>> #define BCMA_CORE_DEFAULT ? ? ? ? ? ? ?0xFFF
>> we could want to include. Then we would loose additional (0xFFF -
>> 0x837) u16 entries in array.
> What is the purpose for bcma_device_name in bus driver code ? Why not
> define const char *name in struct bcma_driver and let driver writers
> supply kernel with knowledge on new cores' names rather than hard type
> those into the bus code ?

The purpose is ridiculously trivial. Print user-friendly names on
scanning. Why not do that?

Let's allow user understand what his bus contains without looking info
defines in .h.


> Also this will close the question Arend asked
> you regarding same core ids with different manufacturer ids.

I don't know what was Arend's question. I asked but it was few minutes
ago. I guess he just wanted to point there can be other manufacturer's
cores.

-- 
Rafa?