[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220727220220.GA218338@bhelgaas>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 17:02:20 -0500
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Stanimir Varbanov <svarbanov@...sol.com>,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof WilczyĆski <kw@...ux.com>,
Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
Selvam Sathappan Periakaruppan <quic_speriaka@...cinc.com>,
Baruch Siach <baruch.siach@...lu.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>,
Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: qcom: Sort variants by Qcom IP rev
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 02:45:34PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 22, 2022 at 10:49:19AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > From: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
> >
> > Previously the variant resource structs, ops, etc., were in no obvious
> > order (mostly but not consistently in *Synopsys* IP rev order, which is not
> > reflected in the naming).
> >
> > Reorder them in order of the struct and function names. No functional
> > change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 732 ++++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 366 insertions(+), 366 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > index c27e3494179f..d0237d821323 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
>
> Moving code around like this makes code forensics harder as it messes up
> git blame. At least the callbacks appears to be grouped by IP version
> currently, so not sure how much you gain from moving the callbacks
> around.
The existing hodge-podge is sloppy and makes code reading harder for
everybody. If we want them grouped by IP version, they should be
*named* by IP version.
> > -static const struct qcom_pcie_cfg sc8180x_cfg = {
> > - .ops = &ops_1_9_0,
> > - .has_tbu_clk = true,
> > -};
> > -
> > static const struct qcom_pcie_cfg ipq6018_cfg = {
> > .ops = &ops_2_9_0,
> > };
>
> But this bit I disagree with. Why sort the SoCs configurations by IP
> revision, when what you typically need is to look them up by name?
Makes sense.
> Also note that this conflicts with my sc8280xp-support and IP-revision
> series:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220714071348.6792-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/
>
> The result of applying that series is that these structs are renamed
> after the IP revision (and sorted alphabetically) so the end-result is
> similar.
>
> Could you consider dropping this patch, or at least the struct
> qcom_pcie_cfg bits, and applying the above series for 5.20?
I dropped it for now. We can see how it shakes out after your series,
but not sure I'll get to it for this cycle.
Bjorn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists