On 08/14/2012 12:25 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Jiang Liu <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> From: Jiang Liu <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> As suggested by Bjorn Helgaas and Don Dutile in threads >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-pci/msg15663.html, we could improve access >> to PCIe capabilities register in to way: >> 1) cache content of PCIe Capabilities Register into struct pce_dev to avoid >> repeatedly reading this register because it's read only. >> 2) provide access functions for PCIe Capabilities registers to hide differences >> among PCIe base specifications, so the caller don't need to handle those >> differences. >> >> This patch set applies to >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/helgaas/pci.git pci-next > > Would you mind rebasing this to v3.6-rc1? I think you posted this > when my branch was still 3.5-based, and there are some upstream > changes that cause minor conflicts here. > > You currently have: > > int pci_pcie_capability_change_word(struct pci_dev *dev, int pos, > u16 set_bits, u16 clear_bits) > > I think this is a bit awkward because the function name doesn't > suggest *how* the word will be changed, and the clearing happens > before the setting (opposite the parameter order). Something like: > > int pci_pcie_capability_mask_and_set_word(..., u16 mask, u16 set) or > int pci_pcie_capability_clear_and_set_word(..., u16 clear, u16 set) > > would be more obvious. If you use "mask_and_set", I think the > function should do "(val & mask) | set" with the complement being at > the call site. If you use "clear_and_set", I think it's OK to do > "(val & ~mask) | set" as in your current patch. > > I know I suggested the "pci_pcie_capability_*" names, but they're > getting a bit unwieldy, especially if we do "mask_and_set" or similar. > There are already several "pcie_*" functions, so maybe we should > drop the leading "pci_" from these and just have: > > pcie_capability_read_word > pcie_capability_write_word > pcie_capability_mask_and_set_word > > Bjorn > Hi Bjorn, I have made following changes according to your suggestions, 1) get rid of the "pci_" prefix for access functions. 2) rename pci_pcie_capability_change_{word|dword}() to pcie_capability_clear_and_set_{word|dword}. 3) add pcie_capability_{set|clear}_{word|dword}(). 4) Add "Acked-by" and "Reviewed-by" 5) rebase to your latest pci-next tree So could you please help to pull from "https://github.com/jiangliu/linux.git topic/pcie-cap" or should I send all the patches to mail list again? Regards! Gerry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
