On Sat, Jul 29, 2023 at 10:58:46AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 7/29/23 10:55, Damien Le Moal wrote: > > On 7/29/23 10:35, Serge Semin wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 01:02:11PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 05:10:27PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > >>>> On 7/21/23 16:44, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > >>>>> Using "INTx" instead of "legacy" is more specific. So, rename > >>>>> PCI_EPC_IRQ_LEGACY to PCI_EPC_IRQ_INTX. > >>>>> > >>>>> Suggested-by: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>> Acked-by: Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@xxxxxxxx> # ARTPEC > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >> > >>>> I would rather drop completely the PCI_EPC_IRQ_XXX enum and simply use the > >>>> PCI_IRQ_XXX macros used everywhere. Less definitions :) > >>>> > >>>> See attached patch that I have in my queue (about to send that). > >>>> > >>> > >>> It looks better! This patch should be dropped. > >> > >> Back then Bjorn specifically asked to change the names suffix in a > >> preparation patch before adding the INTx support to the DW PCIe core > >> driver (see the Sb tag in the patch log). Damien, seeing you cleanup > >> the names anyway what about fixing the macro suffix too: INTx instead > >> of LEGACY)? > > > > Sure, I can do that. That is going to be a gigantic patch though given that > > PCI_IRQ_LEGACY is used well beyond the ep/pcie controller drivers. > > While I agree it would be nice to do, not sure it is worth such code churn. > > > >> Mani, Damien, what do you suggest to Yoshihiro to do with the > >> LEGACY/INTx names in the following up patches of this series? > > > > If everyone is OK with the patch I proposed (the PCI_IRQ_LEGACY -> PCI_IRQ_INTx > > change can go on top), then I can rebase it and send it next week (the remaining > > of my EP cleanup series needs some more testing & rebasing). Yoshihiro can > > either include it in his series or rebase on it if the patch is added to > > pci-next quickly. > > Note that we could start by simply defining an alias: > > #define PCI_IRQ_INTx PCI_IRQ_LEGACY > > and gradually convert all drivers using it until we can get rid of PCI_IRQ_LEGACY. > > That probably would be simpler than a treewide patch that would likely create > lots of conflicts. Sounds good to me. Though it's better to wait for the Bjorn opinion about that before moving forward with the implementation. -Serge(y) > > -- > Damien Le Moal > Western Digital Research >
