linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 06/14] irqchip: gicv3-its: platform-msi: refactor its_pmsi

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <b51b7be9-f8ee-57f9-6d53-6e8bd73dd431@semihalf.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 08:29:10 +0100
From:   Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>
To:     Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxarm@...wei.com,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ma Jun <majun258@...wei.com>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
        Agustin Vega-Frias <agustinv@...eaurora.org>,
        Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>,
        charles.garcia-tobin@....com, huxinwei@...wei.com,
        yimin@...wei.com, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 06/14] irqchip: gicv3-its: platform-msi: refactor
 its_pmsi_init() to prepare for ACPI

On 04.01.2017 08:02, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> Hi Tomasz,
>
> On 2017/1/3 15:41, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can we merge patch 4 & 6 into one patch so that we keep refactoring part
>> as one piece ? I do not see a reason to keep them separate or have patch
>> 5 in between. You can refactor what needs to be refactored, add
>> necessary functions to iort.c and then support ACPI for
>> irq-gic-v3-its-platform-msi.c
>
> There are two functions here,
>  - retrieve the dev id from IORT which was DT based only;
>
>  - init the platform msi domain from MADT;
>
> For each of them split it into two steps,
>  - refactor the code for ACPI later and it's easy for review
>    because wen can easily to figure out it has functional
>    change or not
>
>  - add ACPI functionality
>
> Does it make sense?

It is up to Marc, but personally I prefer:
1. Refactor dev id retrieving and init function in one patch and 
highlight no functional changes in changelog
2. Crate necessary infrastructure in iort.c
3. Then add ACPI support to irq-gic-v3-its-platform-msi.c

Thanks,
Tomasz