From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp01.au.ibm.com (e23smtp01.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.143]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D47F1A013E for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:43:32 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from localhost by e23smtp01.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:43:30 +1000 Received: from d23relay10.au.ibm.com (d23relay10.au.ibm.com [9.190.26.77]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB112BB003F for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:43:25 +1100 (EST) Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (d23av02.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.138]) by d23relay10.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id tANMhHpx64749618 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:43:25 +1100 Received: from d23av02.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av02.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id tANMgqKA001281 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:42:53 +1100 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 09:42:27 +1100 From: Gavin Shan To: Alexey Kardashevskiy Cc: Gavin Shan , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, bhelgaas@google.com, grant.likely@linaro.org, robherring2@gmail.com, panto@antoniou-consulting.com, frowand.list@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 12/50] powerpc/powernv: Track M64 segment consumption Message-ID: <20151123224227.GB5375@gwshan> Reply-To: Gavin Shan References: <1446642770-4681-1-git-send-email-gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1446642770-4681-13-git-send-email-gwshan@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <56498D77.2060101@ozlabs.ru> <20151117010446.GA26294@gwshan> <564D1382.6030504@ozlabs.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <564D1382.6030504@ozlabs.ru> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:10:42AM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >On 11/17/2015 12:04 PM, Gavin Shan wrote: >>On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 07:01:59PM +1100, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>On 11/05/2015 12:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote: >>>>As we track M32 segment consumption, this introduces an array to >>>>the PHB to track the mapping between M64 segment and PE number. >>>>The information is going to be used to find M64 segment from the >>>>PE number during PCI unplugging time in subsequent patches. >>> >>> >>>It would not hurt to put a few words about how we managed to live without >>>such a mapping for M64 before but we needed mapping for M32. >>> >> >>The M32 mapping (phb->ioda.m32_segmap[]) isn't used for anything before >>this patcheset. There're no need for M64 mapping before this patchset >>similarly, no need to add the words. > >After years I learned that reviewers ask less questions about new but yet >unused code when I put few words in the commit log confirming that it is not >used now but it will be used for later. > >And it is not obvious that m32_segment is not used. And m64_segmap is started >being used only 13 patches later in: > >[PATCH v7 27/50] powerpc/powernv: Dynamically release PEs > >which is quite far, complicates reviewing. 12/50 is better be moved there (to >make it 26/50) or just merged into 27/50. > It doesn't make sense to me. As said in PATCH[00/50], the patchset consists of 3 separate parts: PowerNV PCI rework; Using PCI slot; Hotplug standalone driver; For the first part ("PowerNV PCI rework"), the patches are organized in order: refactor/cleanup, IO/M32/M64, DMA, PE allocation/deallocation. So I don't think I need move the patch around if you don't have a stronger reason. Thanks, Gavin