From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01DCF1B59A; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:07:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706285253; cv=none; b=PC86/x3VsKoQM/yGDE2QDT4MG+0vO9Y296hNkZj9/CdvZKabFL0jwVLzI6jmoGTOWBDUJ4oXuVPNSXlrvSwjd0KsmlddcsYFmbEo/dXY3SSenIQOfuq7bUdbaZEO3TPBIFSMk2ag2PJidH9kci6IbH3vm04gwAU2OfkXOnXnch8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706285253; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gI+2AU1uVOrK/dIL2QzpzRnID+W2zsuBKmshc8YIqzE=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=CNI6cBL6byIDUnnsY1PhJX0EvumnhhC6mxTM3aQWVc4X/ekmXGiiT4kkz2Yt1fLlOBd2dy/hIZtEoOOMFL4c+nOaOerU0LQ2+W2KAnnF2rjkuxhCaP3R0xpn/SgatwI3T97DDufC4GllXXNPdo1a0j2zX0LLIqevMEKCXB8ZHmo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=Huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TM2ZF1QHWz6J9ln; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 00:04:21 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.191.163.240]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 339D2140AB8; Sat, 27 Jan 2024 00:07:27 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.202.227.76) by lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:07:26 +0000 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:07:25 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Robert Richter CC: Alison Schofield , Vishal Verma , Ira Weiny , Dan Williams , Dave Jiang , "Davidlohr Bueso" , , , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] cxl/pci: Rename DOE mailbox handle to doe_mb Message-ID: <20240126160725.00006dba@Huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20240108114833.241710-2-rrichter@amd.com> References: <20240108114833.241710-1-rrichter@amd.com> <20240108114833.241710-2-rrichter@amd.com> Organization: Huawei Technologies Research and Development (UK) Ltd. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.1.0 (GTK 3.24.33; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100004.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.219) To lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:48:31 +0100 Robert Richter wrote: > Trivial variable rename for the DOE mailbox handle from cdat_doe to > doe_mb. The variable name cdat_doe is too ambiguous, use doe_mb that > is commonly used for the mailbox. > > Signed-off-by: Robert Richter I don't feel strongly about this one either way, but I've probably spent too long looking at this code in the past. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron > --- > drivers/cxl/core/pci.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c > index 6c9c8d92f8f7..89bab00bb291 100644 > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c > @@ -518,14 +518,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(cxl_hdm_decode_init, CXL); > FIELD_PREP(CXL_DOE_TABLE_ACCESS_ENTRY_HANDLE, (entry_handle))) > > static int cxl_cdat_get_length(struct device *dev, > - struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe, > + struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb, > size_t *length) > { > __le32 request = CDAT_DOE_REQ(0); > __le32 response[2]; > int rc; > > - rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > + rc = pci_doe(doe_mb, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS, > &request, sizeof(request), > &response, sizeof(response)); > @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@ static int cxl_cdat_get_length(struct device *dev, > } > > static int cxl_cdat_read_table(struct device *dev, > - struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe, > + struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb, > void *cdat_table, size_t *cdat_length) > { > size_t length = *cdat_length + sizeof(__le32); > @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static int cxl_cdat_read_table(struct device *dev, > size_t entry_dw; > int rc; > > - rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > + rc = pci_doe(doe_mb, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS, > &request, sizeof(request), > data, length); > @@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port) > { > struct device *uport = port->uport_dev; > struct device *dev = &port->dev; > - struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe; > + struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb; > struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL; > struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd; > size_t cdat_length; > @@ -638,16 +638,16 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port) > if (!pdev) > return; > > - cdat_doe = pci_find_doe_mailbox(pdev, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > - CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS); > - if (!cdat_doe) { > + doe_mb = pci_find_doe_mailbox(pdev, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL, > + CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS); > + if (!doe_mb) { > dev_dbg(dev, "No CDAT mailbox\n"); > return; > } > > port->cdat_available = true; > > - if (cxl_cdat_get_length(dev, cdat_doe, &cdat_length)) { > + if (cxl_cdat_get_length(dev, doe_mb, &cdat_length)) { > dev_dbg(dev, "No CDAT length\n"); > return; > } > @@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port) > if (!cdat_buf) > return; > > - rc = cxl_cdat_read_table(dev, cdat_doe, cdat_buf, &cdat_length); > + rc = cxl_cdat_read_table(dev, doe_mb, cdat_buf, &cdat_length); > if (rc) > goto err; >