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: <e08b5583-bb82-4676-2370-1147d79416ac@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 09:02:40 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To:     Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
        Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.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 04/01/17 08:25, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2017/1/4 15:29, Tomasz Nowicki wrote:
>> 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
> 
> I have no strong preferences, and it's easy to do so as just
> need to squash/reorder the patches.
> 
> Marc, Lorenzo, could you give some suggestions here?

I think it'd make the reviewing easier to have patches that are
semantically grouped together (all the ACPI IORT together, for example).

It would help understanding where you're aiming at instead of jumping
from irqchip to ACPI and back every other patch...

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...