linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
To: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
	heiko@sntech.de, manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org,
	robh@kernel.org, jingoohan1@gmail.com, shawn.lin@rock-chips.com,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Reorganize register and bitfield definitions
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:03:30 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6c962047-c258-40f5-966b-ec1e985e6cb7@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aAeL_Wr42ETm7S96@ryzen>



On 2025/4/22 20:30, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 07:28:29PM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
>> Register definitions were scattered with ambiguous names (e.g.,
>> PCIE_RDLH_LINK_UP_CHGED in PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MISC) and lacked
>> hierarchical grouping. Magic values for bit operations reduced code
>> clarity.
>>
>> Group registers and their associated bitfields logically. This improves
>> maintainability and aligns the code with hardware documentation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c | 42 +++++++++++--------
>>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
>> index fd5827bbfae3..cdc8afc6cfc1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
>> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>>    * Author: Simon Xue <xxm@rock-chips.com>
>>    */
>>   
>> +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
>>   #include <linux/clk.h>
>>   #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>>   #include <linux/irqchip/chained_irq.h>
>> @@ -34,30 +35,35 @@
>>   
>>   #define to_rockchip_pcie(x) dev_get_drvdata((x)->dev)
>>   
>> -#define PCIE_CLIENT_RC_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0x40)
>> -#define PCIE_CLIENT_EP_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE(0xf0, 0x0)
>> -#define PCIE_CLIENT_ENABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0xc)
>> -#define PCIE_CLIENT_DISABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE(0x0c, 0x8)
>> -#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MSG_RX	0x04
>> +#define PCIE_CLIENT_GENERAL_CONTROL	0x0
>> +#define  PCIE_CLIENT_RC_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0x40)
>> +#define  PCIE_CLIENT_EP_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE(0xf0, 0x0)
>> +#define  PCIE_CLIENT_ENABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0xc)
>> +#define  PCIE_CLIENT_DISABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE(0x0c, 0x8)
>> +
>> +#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MSG_RX	0x4
>> +#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_LEGACY	0x8
>> +
>>   #define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MISC	0x10
>> +#define  PCIE_RDLH_LINK_UP_CHGED	BIT(1)
>> +#define  PCIE_LINK_REQ_RST_NOT_INT	BIT(2)
>> +
>> +#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_MASK_LEGACY	0x1c
>>   #define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_MASK_MISC	0x24
>> +
>>   #define PCIE_CLIENT_POWER		0x2c
>> +#define  PME_READY_ENTER_L23		BIT(3)
>> +
>>   #define PCIE_CLIENT_MSG_GEN		0x34
>> -#define PME_READY_ENTER_L23		BIT(3)
>> -#define PME_TURN_OFF			(BIT(4) | BIT(20))
>> -#define PME_TO_ACK			(BIT(9) | BIT(25))
>> -#define PCIE_SMLH_LINKUP		BIT(16)
>> -#define PCIE_RDLH_LINKUP		BIT(17)
>> -#define PCIE_LINKUP			(PCIE_SMLH_LINKUP | PCIE_RDLH_LINKUP)
> 
> This patch removes PCIE_LINKUP, without adding it somewhere else
> so I don't think this patch will compile.
> 
> I think the removal of this line has to be in patch 3/3.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I think that Bjorn's primary concern:
> """
> The #defines for register offsets and bits are kind of a mess,
> e.g., PCIE_SMLH_LINKUP, PCIE_RDLH_LINKUP, PCIE_LINKUP,
> PCIE_L0S_ENTRY, and PCIE_LTSSM_STATUS_MASK are in
> PCIE_CLIENT_LTSSM_STATUS, but you couldn't tell that from the
> names, and they're not even defined together.
> """"
> 
> is that the fields are not prefixed with the register name.

Hi Niklas,

As per rk3588 TRM, section "11.4.2.1 PCIE_CLIENT Registers Summary 
Detail Registers Description"

The register names are as follows. I plan to add comments for each 
register in the next version, and the comments come from the register 
description of TRM.

/* General Control Register */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_GENERAL_CON		0x0
#define  PCIE_CLIENT_RC_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0x40)
#define  PCIE_CLIENT_EP_MODE		HIWORD_UPDATE(0xf0, 0x0)
#define  PCIE_CLIENT_ENABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(0xc)
#define  PCIE_CLIENT_DISABLE_LTSSM	HIWORD_UPDATE(0x0c, 0x8)

/* Interrupt Status Register Related to Message Reception */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MSG_RX	0x4

/* Interrupt Status Register Related to Legacy Interrupt */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_LEGACY	0x8

/*  Interrupt Status Register Related to Miscellaneous Operation */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_STATUS_MISC	0x10
#define  PCIE_RDLH_LINK_UP_CHGED	BIT(1)
#define  PCIE_LINK_REQ_RST_NOT_INT	BIT(2)

/* Interrupt Mask Register Related to Legacy Interrupt */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_MASK_LEGACY	0x1c

/* Interrupt Mask Register Related to Miscellaneous Operation */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_INTR_MASK_MISC	0x24

/* Power Management Control Register */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_POWER_CON		0x2c
#define  PME_READY_ENTER_L23		BIT(3)

/*  Message Generation Control Register */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_MSG_GEN_CON		0x34
#define  PME_TURN_OFF			HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(BIT(4))
#define  PME_TO_ACK			HIWORD_UPDATE_BIT(BIT(9))

/* Hot Reset Control Register */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_HOT_RESET_CTRL	0x180
#define  PCIE_LTSSM_ENABLE_ENHANCE	BIT(4)

/* LTSSM Status Register */
#define PCIE_CLIENT_LTSSM_STATUS	0x300
#define  PCIE_SMLH_LINKUP		BIT(16)
#define  PCIE_RDLH_LINKUP		BIT(17)
#define  PCIE_LINKUP			(PCIE_SMLH_LINKUP | PCIE_RDLH_LINKUP)
#define  PCIE_LTSSM_STATUS_MASK		GENMASK(5, 0)

Best regards,
Hans

> 
> the secondary concern is that they are not grouped together.
> 
> This patch is just solving the secondary concern.
> 
> Since you are fixing his secondary concern, should you perhaps also
> address his primary concern?
> 
> 
> 
> Kind regards,
> Niklas


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-04-22 16:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-22 11:28 [PATCH 0/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Reorganize register and bitfield definitions Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 11:28 ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Remove unused PCIE_CLIENT_GENERAL_DEBUG Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 11:35   ` Niklas Cassel
2025-04-22 11:28 ` [PATCH 2/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Reorganize register and bitfield definitions Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 11:47   ` Niklas Cassel
2025-04-22 11:51     ` Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 12:30   ` Niklas Cassel
2025-04-22 12:39     ` Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 16:03     ` Hans Zhang [this message]
2025-04-22 11:28 ` [PATCH 3/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Unify link status checks with FIELD_GET Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 11:39   ` Niklas Cassel
2025-04-22 11:50     ` Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 12:24       ` Niklas Cassel
2025-04-22 12:29         ` Hans Zhang
2025-04-22 11:35 ` [PATCH 0/3] PCI: dw-rockchip: Reorganize register and bitfield definitions Hans Zhang

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=6c962047-c258-40f5-966b-ec1e985e6cb7@163.com \
    --to=18255117159@163.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=cassel@kernel.org \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=jingoohan1@gmail.com \
    --cc=kw@linux.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
    --cc=manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).