Hi Bjorn,
On 01/12/2017 03:50 AM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Hi Jaehoon,
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 05:16:11PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>> There is no reason to maintain *_blk/phy/elbi_* as register accessors.
>> It can be replaced to one register accessor.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/pci/host/pci-exynos.c | 214 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>> 1 file changed, 97 insertions(+), 117 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-exynos.c b/drivers/pci/host/pci-exynos.c
>> index f1c544b..6dbfa2c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-exynos.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-exynos.c
>> @@ -102,197 +102,175 @@ struct exynos_pcie {
>> #define PCIE_PHY_TRSV3_PD_TSV (0x1 << 7)
>> #define PCIE_PHY_TRSV3_LVCC 0x31c
>>
>> -static void exynos_elb_writel(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
>> +static void exynos_pcie_writel(void __iomem *base, u32 val, u32 reg)
>> {
>> - writel(val, exynos_pcie->elbi_base + reg);
>> + writel(val, base + reg);
>> }
>>
>> -static u32 exynos_elb_readl(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 reg)
>> +static u32 exynos_pcie_readl(void __iomem *base, u32 reg)
>> {
>> - return readl(exynos_pcie->elbi_base + reg);
>> + return readl(base + reg);
>> }
>>
>> -static void exynos_phy_writel(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
>> -{
>> - writel(val, exynos_pcie->phy_base + reg);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static u32 exynos_phy_readl(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 reg)
>> -{
>> - return readl(exynos_pcie->phy_base + reg);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void exynos_blk_writel(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 val, u32 reg)
>> -{
>> - writel(val, exynos_pcie->block_base + reg);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static u32 exynos_blk_readl(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie, u32 reg)
>> -{
>> - return readl(exynos_pcie->block_base + reg);
>> -}
>> -
>> -static void exynos_pcie_sideband_dbi_w_mode(struct exynos_pcie *exynos_pcie,
>> - bool on)
>> +static void exynos_pcie_sideband_dbi_w_mode(struct exynos_pcie *ep, bool on)
>
> Replacing all the separate accessors with one that takes the base
> pointer is OK, but please use the same name for all the "struct
> exynos_pcie *" pointers in the whole file.
>
> Before your patch, they were all called "exynos_pci"; after it some
> are called "exynos_pci" and some are called "ep".
I will use the 'ep' as name, exynos_pcie is a little bit long.
When 'exynos_pcie' is used, some code is need to change lines because of 80 char.
I think it's the meaningless line changing.
I will resend the PATCH v2..also patches relevant to using PHY framework.
After applying everything, i will upstream TM2(Exynos5433) PCIe patches.
Thanks for reviewing.
Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung
>
> Bjorn
> --
> 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
>
>
--
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
