Re: [PATCH v2] mtd: parsers: bcm63xx: simplify CFE detection

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Miquèl,

> El 12 jun 2020, a las 9:02, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
> 
> Hi Álvaro,
> 
> Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Thu, 11 Jun 2020
> 18:14:20 +0200:
> 
>> Hi Florian,
>> 
>>> El 11 jun 2020, a las 17:42, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> escribió:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/11/2020 8:16 AM, Álvaro Fernández Rojas wrote:  
>>>> Hi Miquel,
>>>> 
>>>>> El 11 jun 2020, a las 9:55, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Álvaro,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx> wrote on Mon,  8 Jun 2020
>>>>> 18:06:49 +0200:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Instead of trying to parse CFE version string, which is customized by some
>>>>>> vendors, let's just check that "CFE1" was passed on argument 3.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> v2: use CFE_EPTSEAL definition and avoid using an additional funtion.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm63xxpart.c | 29 ++++-------------------------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm63xxpart.c b/drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm63xxpart.c
>>>>>> index 78f90c6c18fd..493a75b2f266 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm63xxpart.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm63xxpart.c
>>>>>> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@
>>>>>> #include <linux/mtd/partitions.h>
>>>>>> #include <linux/of.h>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> +#include <asm/bootinfo.h>
>>>>>> +#include <asm/fw/cfe/cfe_api.h>  
>>>>> 
>>>>> Are you sure both includes are needed?  
>>>> 
>>>> asm/bootinfo.h is needed for fw_arg3 and asm/fw/cfe/cfe_api.h is needed for CFE_EPTSEAL.
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't think it is a good habit to include asm/ headers, are you sure
>>>>> there is not another header doing it just fine?  
>>>> 
>>>> Both are needed unless you want to add another definition of CFE_EPTSEAL value.
>>>> There are currently two CFE magic definitions, the one in asm/fw/cfe/cfe_api.h and another one in bcm47xxpart.c:
>>>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/mips/include/asm/fw/cfe/cfe_api.h#L28
>>>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/mtd/parsers/bcm47xxpart.c#L33  
>>> 
>>> The caveat with that approach is that this reduces the compilation
>>> surface to MIPS and BMIPS_GENERIC and BCM63XX only, which is a bit
>>> small. If we could move the CFE definitions to a shared header, and
>>> consolidate the value used by bcm47xxpart.c as well, that would allow us
>>> to build the bcm63xxpart.c file with COMPILE_TEST on other
>>> architectures. This does not really have functional value, but for
>>> maintainers like Miquel, it allows them to quickly test their entire
>>> drivers/mtd/ directory.  
>> 
>> I don’t think fw_arg3 available on non mips archs, is it?
>> I’m happy to move it to a shared header (which would be a good location for this?), but if I’m right it would still be restricted to MIPS.
> 
> Restricting a definition to MIPS, even if it makes sense for you is
> very limiting for me. I need to be able to build as much drivers as I
> can from my laptop and verify they at least compile correctly. If I need
> a MIPS toolchain, an ARC toolchain, a PowerPC, an ARM, an ARM64 and
> whatever other funky toolchain to do just that in X steps: it's very
> painful. We have been adding COMPILE_TEST dependencies on as much
> drivers as we could and we want to continue moving forward. Using such
> include would need to drop the COMPILE_TEST condition from Kconfig and
> this is not something I am willing to do.

I totally understand and agree with your point, but I still think that there could be a solution which would be valid for both of us.

> 
> Thanks for your understanding :)

The current way of detecting CFE isn’t the proper one.
Thank you for understanding that too.

> Miquèl

Best regards,
Álvaro.



______________________________________________________
Linux MTD discussion mailing list
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/




[Index of Archives]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Photo]

  Powered by Linux