From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 E5DC013D250; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 20:21:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711484479; cv=none; b=D4eFRcRicasH8n59usSNd43qc40JvCPmU3idAo8e6dAkZZ52u6ZNlTXMAOhHHhubhpxQuCTemVaowzCjHZFHZ63Z0Bsd/hVDxDKr6Huw9zPi4Qo35KWEjzMIMVzElnp+XY8Hv/9ZXTtnWxlHt2zFU9d8w1idEHdK2X46Wow5iVU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711484479; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DKZdM9njkjBXtCvH6zuIqfP67yzAUkND2R8WjVveF+A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=V4/7BcL1vMN0lmP3wewi806fVRHOmoQCddCXKEqAa+bQf0jBpFIqCh5sws1RrzD9Bex54dgtt11y3sL5o5lEprwvGqoR37vjTJ4iev3CnCiQEeMEd6AxhUgCIUjlQE2+P6CTCHDMI1hjmf8ZFvE6KLl8jExmTU0Z3Y/8GCBsLsU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=u8DWXsdd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="u8DWXsdd" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82BAEC433C7; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 20:21:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1711484478; bh=DKZdM9njkjBXtCvH6zuIqfP67yzAUkND2R8WjVveF+A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=u8DWXsddT8c621kDqyxDAHRqxQq4Ke56H2ptu1ZzuOfTIDjyZxqRhDE0g58w2WF63 LNQRLfdRpNrcelyV37lsA2/sptYb0PEhZAROX21/XWVU3Ah3IITZ8JdPxn+YmFycep UQiXvzEqSjpoJLe/SxD8XSSCuceCWbxqJ07arWBJriTAO+D4JYOH8BoxzpEMRPyvD9 xFth5nPj9QWSzkAdFvi9hgiYYbs1ltRXZJPWduQiFLi4lw8OjRgnlrMraRLHGg5WkQ YtrRE1p6vgjJJmVEfsP79coyO5FKdn/AhNDLiL021aPveArbgHPoMNzIOdzSI368A+ G+LhoZahs4S/A== Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 15:21:16 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Yoshihiro Shimoda Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, robh@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org, conor+dt@kernel.org, jingoohan1@gmail.com, gustavo.pimentel@synopsys.com, mani@kernel.org, marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] PCI: dwc: rcar-gen4: Add a new function pointer for other SoC support Message-ID: <20240326202116.GA1492492@bhelgaas> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240326024540.2336155-5-yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com> Include the function pointer name in the subject so it's a little more specific. On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 11:45:38AM +0900, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > This driver can reuse other R-Car Gen4 SoC support. However, some > initializing settings differs between r8a779f0 and others. So, add > a new function pointer start_link_enable() to support other R-Car > Gen4 SoC in the future. No behavior changes. Make it clear here what the new SoC is. I think it's r8a779f0, but you have to read the patch and look for the new .compatible string to figure that out. > Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda > --- > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-rcar-gen4.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-rcar-gen4.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-rcar-gen4.c > index 0be760ed420b..a37613dd9ff4 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-rcar-gen4.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-rcar-gen4.c > @@ -53,9 +53,16 @@ struct rcar_gen4_pcie { > void __iomem *base; > struct platform_device *pdev; > enum dw_pcie_device_mode mode; > + > + int (*start_link_enable)(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar); > }; > #define to_rcar_gen4_pcie(_dw) container_of(_dw, struct rcar_gen4_pcie, dw) > > +struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata { > + enum dw_pcie_device_mode mode; > + int (*start_link_enable)(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar); I think it's confusing to repeat "mode" and "start_link_enable" in both rcar_gen4_pcie and rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata. I know several other drivers use this pattern, but I think it is simpler overall to just save the pointer directly, e.g., imx6_pcie_probe imx6_pcie->drvdata = of_device_get_match_data(dev); ls_pcie_probe pcie->drvdata = of_device_get_match_data(dev); tegra_pcie_dw_probe data = of_device_get_match_data(dev); pcie->of_data = (struct tegra_pcie_dw_of_data *)data; So I think the best thing would be to add struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata, *move* rcar_gen4_pcie.mode there, and save a pointer to the rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata in struct rcar_gen4_pcie. That could be its own separate patch, which is nice on its own because it gets rid of the (void *) casts in rcar_gen4_pcie_of_match[]. Then add .start_link_enable() (or .ltssm_enable(), see below) and the r8a779f0 bits in another patch. > +}; > + > /* Common */ > static void rcar_gen4_pcie_ltssm_enable(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar, > bool enable) > @@ -123,9 +130,13 @@ static int rcar_gen4_pcie_speed_change(struct dw_pcie *dw) > static int rcar_gen4_pcie_start_link(struct dw_pcie *dw) > { > struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar = to_rcar_gen4_pcie(dw); > - int i, changes; > + int i, changes, ret; > > - rcar_gen4_pcie_ltssm_enable(rcar, true); > + if (rcar->start_link_enable) { > + ret = rcar->start_link_enable(rcar); This looks basically like what qcom does: qcom_pcie_start_link if (pcie->cfg->ops->ltssm_enable) pcie->cfg->ops->ltssm_enable(pcie) Can you copy that and use the same name for the pointer and function name (.ltssm_enable, .*_ltssm_enable())? > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + } > > /* > * Require direct speed change with retrying here if the link_gen is > @@ -437,7 +448,10 @@ static void rcar_gen4_remove_dw_pcie_ep(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar) > /* Common */ > static int rcar_gen4_add_dw_pcie(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar) > { > - rcar->mode = (uintptr_t)of_device_get_match_data(&rcar->pdev->dev); > + const struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata *pd = of_device_get_match_data(&rcar->pdev->dev); > + > + rcar->mode = pd->mode; > + rcar->start_link_enable = pd->start_link_enable; > > switch (rcar->mode) { > case DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE: > @@ -500,14 +514,47 @@ static void rcar_gen4_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > rcar_gen4_pcie_unprepare(rcar); > } > > +static int r8a779f0_pcie_start_link_enable(struct rcar_gen4_pcie *rcar) > +{ > + rcar_gen4_pcie_ltssm_enable(rcar, true); Previously we called rcar_gen4_pcie_ltssm_enable() for "renesas,rcar-gen4-pcie" and "renesas,rcar-gen4-pcie-ep". But after this patch, it looks like we only call it for "renesas,r8a779f0-pcie" and "renesas,r8a779f0-pcie-ep"? > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +static struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata platdata_r8a779f0_pcie = { > + .mode = DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE, > + .start_link_enable = r8a779f0_pcie_start_link_enable, > +}; > + > +static struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata platdata_r8a779f0_pcie_ep = { > + .mode = DW_PCIE_EP_TYPE, > + .start_link_enable = r8a779f0_pcie_start_link_enable, > +}; > + > +static struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata platdata_rcar_gen4_pcie = { > + .mode = DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE, > +}; > + > +static struct rcar_gen4_pcie_platdata platdata_rcar_gen4_pcie_ep = { > + .mode = DW_PCIE_EP_TYPE, > +}; > + > static const struct of_device_id rcar_gen4_pcie_of_match[] = { > + { > + .compatible = "renesas,r8a779f0-pcie", > + .data = &platdata_r8a779f0_pcie, > + }, > + { > + .compatible = "renesas,r8a779f0-pcie-ep", > + .data = &platdata_r8a779f0_pcie_ep, > + }, > { > .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen4-pcie", > - .data = (void *)DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE, > + .data = &platdata_rcar_gen4_pcie, > }, > { > .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen4-pcie-ep", > - .data = (void *)DW_PCIE_EP_TYPE, > + .data = &platdata_rcar_gen4_pcie_ep, > }, > {}, > }; > -- > 2.25.1 >