On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 5:12 PM Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 21-10-13 15:49:30, Dan Williams wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 3:45 PM Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On 21-10-09 09:44:34, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > From: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > In preparation for moving parts of register mapping to cxl_core, split > > > > cxl_pci_setup_regs() into a helper that finds register blocks, > > > > (cxl_find_regblock()), and a generic wrapper that probes the precise > > > > register sets within a block (cxl_setup_regs()). > > > > > > > > Move the actual mapping (cxl_map_regs()) of the only register-set that > > > > cxl_pci cares about (memory device registers) up a level from the former > > > > cxl_pci_setup_regs() into cxl_pci_probe(). > > > > > > > > With this change the unused component registers are no longer mapped, > > > > but the helpers are primed to move into the core. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > [djbw: rebase on the cxl_register_map refactor] > > > > [djbw: drop cxl_map_regs() for component registers] > > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > Did you mean to also drop the component register handling in cxl_probe_regs() > > > and cxl_map_regs()? > > > > No, because that has a soon to be added user, right? > > In the current codebase, the port driver gets the offset from cxl_core, not > through the pci driver. I know you wanted this to be passed from cxl_pci (and > indeed it was before). Currently however, the functionality is subsumed by > cxl_find_regblock and is used by cxl_pci (for device registers), cxl_acpi (to > get the CHBCR) and cxl_core (to get the component register block for switches). > > I have no user in cxl_pci for the component registers, and as we discussed, we > have no good way to share them across modules. Are you saying that cxl_probe_regs() will not move to the core in your upcoming series? I was expecting that cxl_find_regblock() and cxl_probe_regs() go hand in hand. > > We can ignore this for now though and discuss it on the list when I post. If > there is a better way to handle this, I'm open to it. It's hard to have discussions about API uses without the patches, but I'm ok to leave further cxl_probe_regs() refactoring to your series.
