linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/12] Update firmware_has_feature() to check architecture bits
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 13:56:16 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5176D950.9010507@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130423115002.3d321e6a69ed97d134127a2b@canb.auug.org.au>

On 04/22/2013 08:50 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:38:47 -0500 Nathan Fontenot <nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>
>> -/* Option vector 5: PAPR/OF options supported */
>> -#define OV5_LPAR		0x80	/* logical partitioning supported */
>> -#define OV5_SPLPAR		0x40	/* shared-processor LPAR supported */
>> +/* Option vector 5: PAPR/OF options supported
>> + * Thses bits are also used for the platform_has_feature() call so
>       ^^^^^
> typo

will fix.

> 
>> + * we encode the vector index in the define and use the OV5_FEAT()
>> + * and OV5_INDX() macros to extract the desired information.
>> + */
>> +#define OV5_FEAT(x)	((x) & 0xff)
>> +#define OV5_INDX(x)	((x) >> 8)
>> +#define OV5_LPAR		0x0280	/* logical partitioning supported */
>> +#define OV5_SPLPAR		0x0240	/* shared-processor LPAR supported */
> 
> Wouldn't it be clearer to say
> 
> #define OV5_LPAR	(OV5_INDX(0x2) | OV5_FEAT(0x80))

The defines won't work the way you used them, they were designed to take the
combined value, i.e. 0x0280, and parse out the index and the feature.

I do think having macros to create the actual values as your example does is easier
to read. We could do something like...

#define OV5_FEAT(x)	((x) & 0xff)
#define OV5_SETINDX(x)	((x) << 8)
#define OV5_GETINDX(x)	((x) >> 8)

#define OV5_LPAR	(OV5_SETINDX(0x2) | OV5_FEAT(0x80))

Thoughts?

> 
> etc?
> 
>> @@ -145,6 +141,7 @@
>>   * followed by # option vectors - 1, followed by the option vectors.
>>   */
>>  extern unsigned char ibm_architecture_vec[];
>> +bool platform_has_feature(unsigned int);
> 
> "extern", please (if nothing else, for consistency).
> 

That shouldn't really be there, its an artifact from a previous patch. I'll remove it.

>> +static __initdata struct vec5_fw_feature
>> +vec5_fw_features_table[FIRMWARE_MAX_FEATURES] = {
> 
> Why make this array FIRMWARE_MAX_FEATURES (63) long?  You could just
> restrict the for loop below to ARRAY_SIZE(vec5_fw_features_table).
> 
>> +	{FW_FEATURE_TYPE1_AFFINITY,	OV5_TYPE1_AFFINITY},
>> +};
>> +
>> +void __init fw_vec5_feature_init(const char *vec5, unsigned long len)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int index, feat;
>> +	int i;
>> +
>> +	pr_debug(" -> fw_vec5_feature_init()\n");
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < FIRMWARE_MAX_FEATURES; i++) {
>> +		if (!vec5_fw_features_table[i].feature)
>> +			continue;
> 
> And this test could go away.
> 
> I realise that you have just copied the existing code, but you should not
> do that blindly.  Maybe you could even add an (earlier) patch that fixes
> the existing code.

I think that could be done easily enough.

Thanks for looking,
-Nathan

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-23 18:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-22 17:54 [PATCH v3 0/12] NUMA CPU Reconfiguration using PRRN Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:30 ` [PATCH v3 1/12] Create a powerpc update_devicetree interface Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  0:15   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-04-23 18:46     ` Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23 20:54       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-04-22 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/12] Correct buffer parsing in update-properties Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:33 ` [PATCH v3 3/12] Add PRRN event handler Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:35 ` [PATCH v3 4/12] Move architecture vector definitions to prom.h Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  0:18   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-04-22 18:38 ` [PATCH v3 5/12] Update firmware_has_feature() to check architecture bits Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  1:50   ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-23 18:56     ` Nathan Fontenot [this message]
2013-04-23  1:52   ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-22 18:40 ` [PATCH v3 6/12] Update numa.c to use updated firmware_has_feature() Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:41 ` [PATCH v3 7/12] Use stop machine to update cpu maps Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  0:24   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2013-04-23 18:58     ` Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:44 ` [PATCH v3 8/12] " Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:45 ` [PATCH v3 9/12] Update NUMA VDSO information Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:46 ` [PATCH v3 10/12] Re-enable Virtual Private Home Node capabilities Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 11/12] Enable PRRN Event handling Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-22 18:47 ` [PATCH v3 12/12] Add /proc interface to control topology updates Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  2:00   ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-23  2:49     ` Michael Ellerman
2013-04-23 18:59       ` Nathan Fontenot
2013-04-23  2:02   ` Stephen Rothwell

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=5176D950.9010507@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    /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).