On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 12:33:18PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 10:08:42AM -0700, Shashank Babu Chinta Venkata wrote:
> > Refactor common code from RC(Root Complex) and EP(End Point)
> > drivers and move them to a common driver. This acts as placeholder
> > for common source code for both drivers, thus avoiding duplication.
>
> Much of this seems to be replacing qcom_pcie_icc_opp_update() and
> qcom_pcie_ep_icc_update() with qcom_pcie_common_icc_update().
>
> That seems worthwhile and it would be helpful if the commit log called
> that out so we'd know what to look for in the patch.
>
> I think the qcom_pcie_common_icc_init() rework would be more
> understandable if it were in its own patch and not mixed in here.
>
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-common.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > +/*
> > + * Copyright (c) 2014-2015, 2020 The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
> > + * Copyright (c) 2015, 2021 Linaro Limited.
> > + * Copyright (c) 2024 Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. All rights reserved.
> > + *
>
> Spurious blank line.
>
> > + */
>
> > +struct icc_path *qcom_pcie_common_icc_get_resource(struct dw_pcie *pci, const char *path)
> > +{
> > + struct icc_path *icc_p;
> > +
> > + icc_p = devm_of_icc_get(pci->dev, path);
> > + return icc_p;
>
> return devm_of_icc_get(pci->dev, path);
>
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_pcie_common_icc_get_resource);
> > +
> > +int qcom_pcie_common_icc_init(struct dw_pcie *pci, struct icc_path *icc, u32 bandwidth)
> > +{
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = icc_set_bw(icc, 0, bandwidth);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(pci->dev, "Failed to set interconnect bandwidth: %d\n",
> > + ret);
> > + return ret;
> > + }
>
> The callers also check and log similar messages. I don't see the
> point.
>
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_pcie_common_icc_init);
>
> These both seem of dubious value.
>
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom-common.h
>
> Do we need "-common" in the filename? Seems like "pcie-qcom.h" would
> be enough. I *hope* we don't someday need both a "pcie-qcom.h and a
> "pcie-qcom-common.h"; that seems like it would really be overkill.
>
I suggested the -common suffix since pcie-qcom is historically meant for RC
driver. So creating a common header with that name will create confusion since
we have a separate EP driver.
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
