[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250115165530.kgzxax7fctguu5x2@thinkpad>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 22:25:30 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
Cc: 'Fan Ni' <nifan.cxl@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, lpieralisi@...nel.org, kw@...ux.com,
robh@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, jingoohan1@...il.com,
Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, a.manzanares@...sung.com,
pankaj.dubey@...sung.com, quic_nitegupt@...cinc.com,
quic_krichai@...cinc.com, gost.dev@...sung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] PCI: dwc: Add debugfs based RASDES support in DWC
On Wed, Dec 11, 2024 at 04:38:34PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Fan Ni <nifan.cxl@...il.com>
> > Sent: 10 December 2024 03:59
> > To: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
> > Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org; lpieralisi@...nel.org;
> > kw@...ux.com; robh@...nel.org; bhelgaas@...gle.com; jingoohan1@...il.com; Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com;
> > a.manzanares@...sung.com; pankaj.dubey@...sung.com; quic_nitegupt@...cinc.com; quic_krichai@...cinc.com;
> > gost.dev@...sung.com
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] PCI: dwc: Add debugfs based RASDES support in DWC
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 01:14:56PM +0530, Shradha Todi wrote:
> > > Add support to use the RASDES feature of DesignWare PCIe controller
> > > using debugfs entries.
> > >
> > > RASDES is a vendor specific extended PCIe capability which reads the
> > > current hardware internal state of PCIe device. Following primary
> > > features are provided to userspace via debugfs:
> > > - Debug registers
> > > - Error injection
> > > - Statistical counters
> >
> > I think this patch can break into several to make it easier to review.
> > For example, it can be divided by the three features list above, with the documentation change coming last as a
> separate
> > patch.
> >
>
> Sure Fan. I have no issues in breaking this into smaller patches. Though I think the documentation
> should go along with the implementation rather than a separate patch?
> Anyway, I'll wait for some time for further review comments or if anyone has any objection to
> splitting the patches before going for the next revision.
>
I don't mind splitting the patches, but as you said, the documentation should go
in the same patch that adds driver support.
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
Powered by blists - more mailing lists