From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19580C021A7 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:25:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=mNvtysCKnSJQOOBHCoqk/LCqlR3UeGeWmQeJQTZazlI=; b=wWjEbQgLGiNt3zy3M+l37wU0oy FSpD720LKeO9TK+VTFtu30N28Yz1xzCffSoZIZmdFQYlSgEFi/0XQW1ALbhgs8KG9BHO99WrpP/Hd WGoLkur5gRCu20DlcSk4rWBIOv5uH21YcqIyyhh/VbZT2bMnUy0IZX3tZ5uPC8pYRoSkgIOx2fklQ w3V5kjD22R6Gz940N6GbJJ7FFZ07bH00l/BFewaaieHs9xfWNsJUqKos49/0pqB62CxUYmprNNUNb 86+AB5BI4G4MdoQCVLTpi9Dua/ObKZF7yUS6/a9+bQ4lipfxSoaJ6GZOq5ceVuV/bqvKJ1gWpLOPc IJadn9PQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tiSel-00000009vr8-2I6H; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:25:03 +0000 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org ([2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1tiSej-00000009vq8-2Ewh for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:25:02 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54CB15C09ED; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:24:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC8F4C4CED1; Thu, 13 Feb 2025 06:24:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1739427900; bh=KjzybRVWtBB1jcf+OqFlxofYcSKym1afinO7ZoGwOGM=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=fsVFn/BesQE+jkk//Zv98vIAgiHnWcSafiH+Cpc/JC5DblkI3UdtH71ia/yk7IOqK aY9cKbXzznojIiEL4fnJpty9Q5HNcP07xJ2hObjbGm6dBaM/kIpvK2ZETpNKtPd6Me 5QcCAFkgw/dmftJ+Q0poW15DWCZF8DfQB7tSkllOSJAVdx97RK0sy3sd5u1pp9Wf9s D0dxlMH4AecIGa5/7n/9pXLhzKvbbCWUs2FpDPw/bdRGghnlAEssoXbm/DPHsT/AR7 oVJZt/u9RKhb59k/bMGF1LS/CDOjdt8tMLKsDLHeqjXOaCSUslm2GP5krsCgbjfBd4 UsC4B6k8tECjg== Message-ID: <0bbe229f-c00f-46b1-8b1b-736577b96b5d@kernel.org> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 15:24:59 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nvme: Cleanup the definition of the controller config register fields To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, Keith Busch , Sagi Grimberg References: <20250210002935.1744249-1-dlemoal@kernel.org> <20250210002935.1744249-2-dlemoal@kernel.org> <20250213060051.GD19506@lst.de> <9455ccc9-75d4-4329-938f-e5691d92caa5@kernel.org> <20250213062329.GA20095@lst.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Damien Le Moal Organization: Western Digital Research In-Reply-To: <20250213062329.GA20095@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20250212_222501_635764_DA4F9236 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.69 ) X-BeenThere: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "Linux-nvme" Errors-To: linux-nvme-bounces+linux-nvme=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2025/02/13 15:23, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 03:07:51PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> I find the single enum for all the fields of the same u32 register to be a nice >> grouping of things. But I agree that more comments would indeed be nice. >> I can add that. But do we really need separate enums for each field ? > > Ah, not really for each sub-field. But the nvme code traditionally > also used a single enum for multiple register or struct fields. If > I read this to quickly and that's not the case here all is fine. Yep, the enum I changed is only for the CC register. Nothing else in there. So I will just add comments. -- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research