On 3/13/2023 7:46 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Jithu,
>
> On 3/1/23 02:59, Jithu Joseph wrote:
>>
>> +struct ifs_const_data {
>> + int integrity_cap_bit;
>> + int test_num;
>> +};
>> +
>
> This is a description of the specific capabilties / bits of
> the IFS on e.g. Saphire Rapids, so please name this appropriately
> for example:
>
> struct ifs_hw_caps {
> int integrity_cap_bit;
> int test_num;
> };
This can be renamed to ifs_test_caps as it holds test specific fields.
...
>
> You got this exactly the wrong way around, there should be a single
>
> static const struct ifs_hw_caps saphire_rapids_caps = {
> .integrity_cap_bit = MSR_INTEGRITY_CAPS_PERIODIC_BIST_BIT,
> .test_num = 0,
> };
>
> And then struct ifs_device { } should have a "const struct ifs_hw_caps *hw_caps"
> which gets initialized to point to &saphire_rapids_caps. So that your const
> data is actually const.
>
> Where as since the r/w data's lifetime is couple to the misc-device lifetime
> there is no need to dynamically allocate it just keep that embedded, so that
> together you get:
Noted
>
> struct ifs_device {
> const struct ifs_hw_caps *hw_caps;
> struct ifs_data data;
> struct miscdevice misc;
> };
>
The initialization portion, taking into account your suggestion above, translates to:
static const struct ifs_test_caps scan_test = {
.integrity_cap_bit = MSR_INTEGRITY_CAPS_PERIODIC_BIST_BIT,
.test_num = IFS_TYPE_SAF,
};
static const struct ifs_test_caps array_test = {
.integrity_cap_bit = MSR_INTEGRITY_CAPS_ARRAY_BIST_BIT,
.test_num = IFS_TYPE_ARRAY_BIST,
};
static struct ifs_device ifs_devices[] = {
[IFS_TYPE_SAF] = {
.test_caps = &scan_test,
.misc = {
.name = "intel_ifs_0",
.minor = MISC_DYNAMIC_MINOR,
.groups = plat_ifs_groups,
},
},
[IFS_TYPE_ARRAY_BIST] = {
.test_caps = &array_test,
.misc = {
.name = "intel_ifs_1",
.minor = MISC_DYNAMIC_MINOR,
.groups = plat_ifs_array_groups,
},
},
};
Jithu
