[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211018103002.00007199@Huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2021 10:30:02 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC: <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] cxl/pci: Add @base to cxl_register_map
On Fri, 15 Oct 2021 09:55:57 -0700
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 9:27 AM Jonathan Cameron
> <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 9 Oct 2021 09:44:29 -0700
> > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In addition to carrying @barno, @block_offset, and @reg_type, add @base
> > > to keep all map/unmap parameters in one object. The helpers
> > > cxl_{map,unmap}_regblock() handle adjusting @base to the @block_offset
> > > at map and unmap time.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> >
> > I don't really mind them, but why the renames
> > from cxl_pci_* to cxl_* ?
>
> Primarily because we had a mix of some functions including the _pci
> and some not, and I steered towards just dropping it. I think the
> "PCI" aspect of the function is clear by its function signature, and
> that was being muddied by passing @cxlm unnecessarily. So instead of:
>
> cxl_pci_$foo(struct cxl_mem *cxlm...)
>
> ...I went with:
>
> cxl_$foo(struct pci_dev *pdev...)
>
> ...concerns?
That's fine,
J
Powered by blists - more mailing lists