On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 11:37:14AM -0500, Jim Quinlan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 10:08 AM Manivannan Sadhasivam > <manivannan.sadhasivam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 12:39:34PM -0500, Jim Quinlan wrote: > > > The constants EXT_CFG_DATA and EXT_CFG_INDEX vary by SOC. One of the > > > map_bus methods used these constants, the other used different constants. > > > Fortunately there was no problem because the SoCs that used the latter > > > map_bus method all had the same register constants. > > > > > > Remove the redundant constants and adjust the code to use them. In > > > addition, update EXT_CFG_DATA to use the 4k-page based config space access > > > system, which is what the second map_bus method was already using. > > > > > > > What is the effect of this change? Why is it required? Sounds like it got > > sneaked in. > > Hello, > There is no functional difference with this commit -- the code will > behave the same. A previous commit set up the "EXT_CFG_DATA" and > "EXT_CFG_INDEX" constants in the offset table but one of the map_bus() > methods did not use them, instead it relied on old generic #define > constants. This commit uses them and gets rid of the old #defines. > My comment was about the change that modified the offset of EXT_CFG_DATA. This was not justified properly. - Mani -- மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
