Re: [PATCH v5 05/22] powerpc/irq: Add helper to set regs->softe

From: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	msuchanek@suse.de, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 05/22] powerpc/irq: Add helper to set regs->softe
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2021 18:47:30 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1615193040.e8vkjfd7b9.astroid@bobo.none> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d243672c-ea47-2d0c-bfe4-e6eed5460868@csgroup.eu>

Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of March 5, 2021 6:54 pm:
> 
> 
> Le 09/02/2021 à 08:49, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
>> Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of February 9, 2021 4:18 pm:
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 09/02/2021 à 02:11, Nicholas Piggin a écrit :
>>>> Excerpts from Christophe Leroy's message of February 9, 2021 1:10 am:
>>>>> regs->softe doesn't exist on PPC32.
>>>>>
>>>>> Add irq_soft_mask_regs_set_state() helper to set regs->softe.
>>>>> This helper will void on PPC32.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> You could do the same with the kuap_ functions to change some ifdefs
>>>> to IS_ENABLED.
>>>>
>>>> That's just my preference but if you prefer this way I guess that's
>>>> okay.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That's also my preference on the long term.
>>>
>>> Here it is ephemeral, I have a follow up series implementing interrupt exit/entry in C and getting
>>> rid of all the assembly kuap hence getting rid of those ifdefs.
>> 
>> I thought it might have been because you hate ifdef more tha most :)
>>   
>>> The issue I see when using IS_ENABLED() is that you have to indent to the right, then you interfere
>>> with the file history and 'git blame'
>> 
>> Valid point if it's just going to indent back the other way in your next
>> series.
>> 
>>> Thanks for reviewing my series and looking forward to your feedback on my series on the interrupt
>>> entry/exit that I will likely release later today.
>> 
>> Cool, I'm eager to see them.
>> 
> 
> Hi Nick, have you been able to look at it ?
> 
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/cover/cover.1612864003.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu/

Hi Christophe,

I had a look at it, it's mostly ppc32 code which I don't know well but 
it looks like a very nice cleanup and it's good to be sharing the C
code here. All the common code changes look fine to me.

I'll take a closer look if you can rebase and repost the series I need 
to create a tree and base 64e conversion on top of yours as they touch
the same common places.

Thanks,
Nick