On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 06:57:20PM -0400, Jim Quinlan wrote: > Do prepatory work for the 7712 SoC, which is introduced in a future commit. > Our HW design has changed two register offsets for the 7712, where > previously it was a common value for all Broadcom SOCs with PCIe cores. > Specifically, the two offsets are to the registers HARD_DEBUG and > INTR2_CPU_BASE. > @@ -1499,12 +1502,16 @@ static const int pcie_offsets[] = { > [RGR1_SW_INIT_1] = 0x9210, > [EXT_CFG_INDEX] = 0x9000, > [EXT_CFG_DATA] = 0x9004, > + [PCIE_HARD_DEBUG] = 0x4204, > + [PCIE_INTR2_CPU_BASE] = 0x4300, > }; > > static const int pcie_offsets_bmips_7425[] = { > [RGR1_SW_INIT_1] = 0x8010, > [EXT_CFG_INDEX] = 0x8300, > [EXT_CFG_DATA] = 0x8304, > + [PCIE_HARD_DEBUG] = 0x4204, > + [PCIE_INTR2_CPU_BASE] = 0x4300, > }; > > static const struct pcie_cfg_data generic_cfg = { > @@ -1539,6 +1546,8 @@ static const int pcie_offset_bcm7278[] = { > [RGR1_SW_INIT_1] = 0xc010, > [EXT_CFG_INDEX] = 0x9000, > [EXT_CFG_DATA] = 0x9004, > + [PCIE_HARD_DEBUG] = 0x4204, > + [PCIE_INTR2_CPU_BASE] = 0x4300, > }; What's the organization scheme here? We now have: static const int pcie_offsets[] = { ... }; static const int pcie_offsets_bmips_7425[] = { ... }; static const int pcie_offset_bcm7712[] = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data generic_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7425_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7435_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm4908_cfg = { ... }; static const int pcie_offset_bcm7278[] = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7278_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm2711_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7216_cfg = { ... }; static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7712_cfg = { ... }; So we have pcie_offsets_bmips_7425[] and pcie_offset_bcm7712[] (with gratuituously different "offset" vs "offsets") which are all together before the pcie_cfg_data. Then we have pcie_offset_bcm7278[] (again gratuitously different "offset") separately, next to bcm7278_cfg. It would be nice to pick one scheme and stick to it. Also a seemingly random order of the pcie_cfg_data structs and .compatible strings. Also a little confusing to have "bmips_7425" and "bcm7425" associated with the same chip. I suppose there's historical reason for it, but I don't think it's helpful in this usage. > static const struct pcie_cfg_data bcm7278_cfg = { > -- > 2.17.1 >