Hi Geert-san, > From: Geert Uytterhoeven, Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 7:26 PM <snip> > > > > > > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c > > > > > > @@ -91,8 +91,12 @@ > > > > > > #define LINK_SPEED_2_5GTS (1 << 16) > > > > > > #define LINK_SPEED_5_0GTS (2 << 16) > > > > > > #define MACCTLR 0x011058 > > > > > > +#define MACCTLR_RESERVED23_16 GENMASK(23, 16) > > > > > > > > > > MACCTLR_NFTS_MASK? > > > > > > > > I should have said on previous email thread [1] though, > > > > since SH7786 PCIE HW manual said NFTS (NFTS) but > > > > any R-Car SoCs' HW manual said just Reserved with H'FF, > > > > so that I prefer to describe RESERVED instead of NFTS. > > > > Do you agree? > > > > > > > > [1] > > > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-renesas-soc&m=157242422327368&w=2 > > > > > > My personal stance is to make it as easy as possible for the reader of > > > the code ("optimize for reading, not for writing"), as code is written once, > > > but read many more times later. > > > This is not the first time register bits were documented before, and changed > > > to reserved later. > > > In this case the resemblance to the SH7786 PCIe block is obvious, and > > > the SH7786 hardware user's manual is available publicly. > > > > Thank you for sharing your stance. I understood it. So, I'll fix it as following. > > Is it acceptable? > > > > #define MACCTLR_NFTS_MASK GENMASK(23, 16) /* The name is from SH7786 */ > > Sounds great to me. > Thanks! Thank you for the reply! I got it! Best regards, Yoshihiro Shimoda
