From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5C4131BC82; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 13:41:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762868514; cv=none; b=a4k3HyaMP5JEnleMToCqb2BO7Ngixs8wHS13GhSOXtDRp2Hq7ICaxSdLDwgy4WIMi+tN212PJDTSGsFpvjYsYjpQzvXs9HlQaeh9QmjHtwEpAhHvHtG07pZgSadJkCGjcLdVQu4VOGJyEqeCuCjsYMqNXJtQqjhliUj5l+o1lhY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762868514; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fe1+2gEl7BKxbS6yXkWkrlv07vfe9fxQ6miKsJwM5Qo=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=BuFOMu99FGQstwfetL+d/HDj7fahX6nNOHG14EcBKx7b1yCIOqTjkKB0EGwCcNdt/jQ6yS4c1+V8kTmluf92UERygt2S6/XkaTJSFdqA6unW02OHrOQub5ii3E9IOAeja5Ht3YmVePovMa3esS0b+5Mm/8Bxj0KNnucTNeEgeJE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.216]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4d5SP60BxwzHnGgr; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 21:41:30 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.146.113]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 358701400D9; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 21:41:47 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.15) by dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.36; Tue, 11 Nov 2025 13:41:46 +0000 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2025 13:41:44 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Alejandro Lucero Palau CC: , , , , , , , , , , "Ben Cheatham" , Fan Ni , "Alison Schofield" Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 06/22] cxl: Move pci generic code Message-ID: <20251111134144.0000513a@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <15f7fc60-b7e5-44f2-99aa-a73dbc145f59@amd.com> References: <20251006100130.2623388-1-alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com> <20251006100130.2623388-7-alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com> <20251007140113.000028ad@huawei.com> <15f7fc60-b7e5-44f2-99aa-a73dbc145f59@amd.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100009.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.83) To dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) On Mon, 10 Nov 2025 11:23:53 +0000 Alejandro Lucero Palau wrote: > On 10/7/25 14:01, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Oct 2025 11:01:14 +0100 > > alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com wrote: > > > >> From: Alejandro Lucero > >> > >> Inside cxl/core/pci.c there are helpers for CXL PCIe initialization > >> meanwhile cxl/pci.c implements the functionality for a Type3 device > >> initialization. > >> > >> Move helper functions from cxl/pci.c to cxl/core/pci.c in order to be > >> exported and shared with CXL Type2 device initialization. > >> > >> Fix cxl mock tests affected by the code move, deleting a function which > >> indeed was not being used since commit 733b57f262b0("cxl/pci: Early > >> setup RCH dport component registers from RCRB"). > >> > > Trivial but can we pull out that code removal as a separate patch? > > It's something Dave would probably pick up immediately. > > > The justification for the removal comes from the changes introduced in > this patch, so I think it should be fine to keep it as it is now, but if > Dave prefers, I will do so. Not going it for v20 though. Ok. My confusion is this commit message says the function was not being used since commit ... Which isn't this patch. Either that is true and the removal is unrelated or that description needs a tweak. Jonathan