[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <MN0PR12MB61017A594AF2CCD1D75EC798E2A29@MN0PR12MB6101.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 22:05:22 +0000
From: "Limonciello, Mario" <Mario.Limonciello@....com>
To: Jan Dąbroś <jsd@...ihalf.com>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>
CC: Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...ihalf.com>,
"Thomas, Rijo-john" <Rijo-john.Thomas@....com>,
"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"Allen, John" <John.Allen@....com>,
"Singh, Brijesh" <Brijesh.Singh@....com>,
Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 3/6] crypto: ccp: Move some PSP mailbox bit definitions
into common header
[Public]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Dąbroś <jsd@...ihalf.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 03:04
> To: Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@....com>
> Cc: Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...ihalf.com>; Thomas, Rijo-john <Rijo-
> john.Thomas@....com>; Lendacky, Thomas
> <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>; herbert@...dor.apana.org.au; Allen, John
> <John.Allen@....com>; Singh, Brijesh <Brijesh.Singh@....com>; Jarkko
> Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>; Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>; Mika Westerberg
> <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>; linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org; linux-
> crypto@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; David S. Miller
> <davem@...emloft.net>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] crypto: ccp: Move some PSP mailbox bit definitions
> into common header
>
> (...)
> > @@ -99,7 +93,7 @@ static int psp_check_mbox_recovery(struct psp_mbox
> __iomem *mbox)
> >
> > tmp = readl(&mbox->cmd_fields);
> >
> > - return FIELD_GET(PSP_MBOX_FIELDS_RECOVERY, tmp);
> > + return FIELD_GET(PSP_CMDRESP_RECOVERY, tmp);
> > }
> >
> > static int psp_wait_cmd(struct psp_mbox __iomem *mbox)
> > @@ -107,7 +101,7 @@ static int psp_wait_cmd(struct psp_mbox __iomem
> *mbox)
> > u32 tmp, expected;
> >
> > /* Expect mbox_cmd to be cleared and ready bit to be set by PSP */
> > - expected = FIELD_PREP(PSP_MBOX_FIELDS_READY, 1);
> > + expected = FIELD_PREP(PSP_CMDRESP_RESP, 1);
>
> What's the meaning of "PSP_CMDRESP_RESP"? I see that this new macro
> name is currently used by other drivers, but in my opinion "READY" is
> more descriptive. (It is also aligned to the comment above this line.)
It should indicate that the PSP has responded. I think both terms work
to describe what's going on.
Tom - What's your preference?
I'll either adjust all the drivers to use READY or fix the comment for v2.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists