From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:03:00 +0200 From: Greg KH To: richard.gong@linux.intel.com Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, dinguyen@kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, atull@kernel.org, mdf@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-fpga@vger.kernel.org, yves.vandervennet@linux.intel.com, richard.gong@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 3/7] driver, misc: add Intel Stratix10 service layer driver Message-ID: <20180423120300.GC7951@kroah.com> References: <1522182014-7338-1-git-send-email-richard.gong@linux.intel.com> <1522182014-7338-4-git-send-email-richard.gong@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1522182014-7338-4-git-send-email-richard.gong@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 03:20:10PM -0500, richard.gong@linux.intel.com wrote: > +config INTEL_SERVICE Naming is hard, but this is a _very_ generic name, don't you agree? > + tristate "Intel Service Layer" As is this. Can you make this a bit more specific to what hardware is being controlled here? > +++ b/drivers/misc/intel-service.c Same for the file name, why not stratix10.c? or intel_svc.c? That makes it a _bit_ more generic. Well, not really, but it does hide the "genericness" a bit more, right? > --- /dev/null > +++ b/include/linux/intel-service-client.h > @@ -0,0 +1,188 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +/* > + * Copyright (C) 2017-2018, Intel Corporation > + */ > + > +#ifndef __INTEL_SERVICE_CLIENT_H > +#define __INTEL_SERVICE_CLIENT_H > + > +/* > + * Service layer driver supports client names > + * > + * fpga: for FPGA configuration > + * dummy: for integration/debug/trouble-shooting > + */ > +#define SVC_CLIENT_FPGA "fpga" > +#define SVC_CLIENT_DUMMY "dummy" > + > +/* > + * Status of the sent command, in bit number > + * > + * SVC_COMMAND_STATUS_RECONFIG_REQUEST_OK: > + * Secure firmware accepts the request of FPGA reconfiguration. > + * > + * SVC_STATUS_RECONFIG_BUFFER_SUBMITTED: > + * Service client successfully submits FPGA configuration > + * data buffer to secure firmware. > + * > + * SVC_COMMAND_STATUS_RECONFIG_BUFFER_DONE: > + * Secure firmware completes data process, ready to accept the > + * next WRITE transaction. > + * > + * SVC_COMMAND_STATUS_RECONFIG_COMPLETED: > + * Secure firmware completes FPGA configuration successfully, FPGA should > + * be in user mode. > + * > + * SVC_COMMAND_STATUS_RECONFIG_BUSY: > + * FPGA configuration is still in process. > + * > + * SVC_COMMAND_STATUS_RECONFIG_ERROR: > + * Error encountered during FPGA configuration. > + */ You have an odd mix of kernel-doc formatting and non-kernel-doc formatting in this file. Pick one and stick with it :) Also, if you use kernel-doc (as you should), please hook it up to the kernel documentation build process to take advantage of it. thanks, greg k-h