From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from tx2outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (tx2ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com [65.55.88.14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "MSIT Machine Auth CA 2" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 351792C00C4 for ; Sat, 7 Sep 2013 01:37:04 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <1378481816.12204.191.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] powerpc/85xx: workaround for chips with MSI hardware errata From: Scott Wood To: Kumar Gala Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 10:36:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: References: <1364954598-31914-1-git-send-email-hongtao.jia@freescale.com> <1364954598-31914-2-git-send-email-hongtao.jia@freescale.com> <1378406276.12204.101.camel@snotra.buserror.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Jia Hongtao , B07421@freescale.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, 2013-09-06 at 10:01 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > On Sep 5, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Scott Wood wrote: > > > On Thu, 2013-09-05 at 13:34 -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: > >> On Apr 2, 2013, at 9:03 PM, Jia Hongtao wrote: > >>> + msi->feature |= MSI_HW_ERRATA_ENDIAN; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> /* > >>> * Remember the phandle, so that we can match with any PCI nodes > >>> * that have an "fsl,msi" property. > >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.h b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.h > >>> index 8225f86..7389e8e 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.h > >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.h > >>> @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ > >>> #define FSL_PIC_IP_IPIC 0x00000002 > >>> #define FSL_PIC_IP_VMPIC 0x00000003 > >>> > >>> +#define MSI_HW_ERRATA_ENDIAN 0x00000010 > >>> + > >> > >> Why does this need to be in the header, why not just have it in the .c only > > > > Didn't you ask this last time around? :-) > > > > This flag is part of the same numberspace as FSL_PIC_IP_xxx and thus > > should be defined in the same place. > > I probably did, if its part of the FSL_PIC_IP_xxx namespace, than lets remove blank line between things to make that a bit more clear It's not part of the FSL_PIC_IP_MASK subnumberspace though, just the overall msi->features numberspace. It would be nice if these symbols could have some sort of prefix in common, though. -Scott