From: <Kelvin.Cao@microchip.com>
To: <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>, <vkoul@kernel.org>,
<George.Ge@microchip.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<logang@deltatee.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] dmaengine: switchtec-dma: Introduce Switchtec DMA engine PCI driver
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 18:18:07 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ee5aa616475cc39b04c6b9e84db119bc8fc4d53.camel@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZGJMKFrLfU2zc/2P@infradead.org>
On Mon, 2023-05-15 at 08:13 -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > > > + union {
> > > > + __le32 saddr_lo;
> > > > + __le32 widata_lo;
> > > > + };
> > > > + union {
> > > > + __le32 saddr_hi;
> > > > + __le32 widata_hi;
> > > > + };
> > >
> > > What is the point for unions of identical data types?
> >
> > The same offset could hold either source address or write immediate
> > data in different transactions. Unions used here is to give
> > different
> > names for the same offset. I guess it improves readability when
> > referring to them with proper names.
>
> I find this rather confusing, especially as some code literally
> switches on the op to fill in either set.
It's a hardware interface, and not possible to change it at the point.
I guess I can make it look slightly better by grouping the related
names together:
union {
struct {
__le32 saddr_lo;
__le32 saddr_hi;
};
struct {
__le32 widata_lo;
__le32 widata_hi;
};
};
>
>
> > > > +#define SWITCHTEC_DMA_DEVICE(device_id) \
> > > > + { \
> > > > + .vendor = PCI_VENDOR_ID_MICROSEMI, \
> > > > + .device = device_id, \
> > > > + .subvendor = PCI_ANY_ID, \
> > > > + .subdevice = PCI_ANY_ID, \
> > > > + .class = PCI_CLASS_SYSTEM_OTHER << 8, \
> > > > + .class_mask = 0xFFFFFFFF, \
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > +static const struct pci_device_id switchtec_dma_pci_tbl[] = {
> > > > + SWITCHTEC_DMA_DEVICE(0x4000), /* PFX 100XG4 */
> > >
> > > This should use the common PCI_DEVICE() macro instead, i.e.
> > >
> > > PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_MICROSEMI, 0x4000), /* PFX
> > > 100XG4 */
> > > ...
> >
> > We also need to distinguish the .class as we have devices of other
> > .class with the same vendor/device ID.
>
> Ok, that's roetty weird and probably worth a little comment.
Will add some comment on this.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-15 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-23 21:37 [PATCH v4 0/1] Switchtec Switch DMA Engine Driver Kelvin Cao
2023-04-23 21:37 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] dmaengine: switchtec-dma: Introduce Switchtec DMA engine PCI driver Kelvin Cao
2023-04-24 1:36 ` kernel test robot
2023-05-03 6:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-05 0:31 ` Kelvin.Cao
2023-05-15 15:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-15 18:18 ` Kelvin.Cao [this message]
2023-05-16 5:00 ` Christoph Hellwig
2023-05-16 5:20 ` Kelvin.Cao
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=0ee5aa616475cc39b04c6b9e84db119bc8fc4d53.camel@microchip.com \
--to=kelvin.cao@microchip.com \
--cc=George.Ge@microchip.com \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
/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