[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2209081318250.61321@rhweight-WRK1>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2022 13:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Wu Hao <hao.wu@...el.com>, Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
russell.h.weight@...el.com, basheer.ahmed.muddebihal@...el.com,
Tom Rix <trix@...hat.com>, Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>,
linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
tianfei.zhang@...el.com, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"open list:SERIAL DRIVERS" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Niklas Söderlund
<niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>,
Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@...esas.com>,
"Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] fpga: dfl: add generic support for MSIX
interrupts
On Thu, 8 Sep 2022, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Matthew,
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 7:34 PM <matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Sep 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 02:37:32PM -0700, matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 6 Sep 2022, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 12:04:25PM -0700, matthew.gerlach@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>> + if (fid != FEATURE_ID_AFU && fid != PORT_FEATURE_ID_ERROR &&
>>>>>> + fid != PORT_FEATURE_ID_UINT && fid != FME_FEATURE_ID_GLOBAL_ERR) {
>>>>>> + v = readq(base);
>>>>>> + v = FIELD_GET(DFH_VERSION, v);
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> + if (v == 1) {
>>>>>> + v = readq(base + DFHv1_CSR_SIZE_GRP);
>>>>>
>>>>> I am already lost what v keeps...
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps
>>>>>
>>>>> v = readq(base);
>>>>> switch (FIELD_GET(DFH_VERSION, v)) {
>>>>> case 1:
>>>>> ...
>>>>> break;
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> How about?
>>>> if (FIELD_GET(DFH_VERSION, readq(base)) == 1) {
>>>> ...
>>>> }
>>>
>>> This one tends to be expanded in the future, so I would keep it switch case.
>>>
>>
>> I'm okay with using the switch statement, but how about the following?
>>
>> switch (FIELD_GET(DFH_VERSION, readq(base))) {
>> case 1:
>> ...
>> break;
>> }
>
> Would it make sense to print an error if a newer version than 1 is detected?
> BTW, what is the expected value when DFHv1 is not detected? Zero
> or an arbitrary number?
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
Hi Geert,
Currently, DFHs that are not version 1 should be version 0. I will fill in
the switch statement to do nothing for version 0, and the default case
will print a warning of an unexpected version.
Thanks for the feedback.
Matthew Gerlach
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists