From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97A53C3F2D8 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 01:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (gabe.freedesktop.org [131.252.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 786162465E for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 01:52:17 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 786162465E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Received: from gabe.freedesktop.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154796E910; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 01:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mga18.intel.com (mga18.intel.com [134.134.136.126]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 661036E910 for ; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 01:52:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Mar 2020 17:52:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.70,509,1574150400"; d="scan'208";a="233597155" Received: from dkilanow-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO intel.com) ([10.251.88.125]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 02 Mar 2020 17:52:12 -0800 Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 03:52:11 +0200 From: Andi Shyti To: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio Message-ID: <20200303015211.GF1536@intel.intel> References: <20200228022843.1936-1-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> <20200228022843.1936-6-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200228022843.1936-6-daniele.ceraolospurio@intel.com> Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 5/6] drm/i915/uc: Move uC debugfs to its own folder under GT X-BeenThere: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel graphics driver community testing & development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces@lists.freedesktop.org Sender: "Intel-gfx" Hi Daniele, I'm sorry I missed this patch, On Thu, Feb 27, 2020 at 06:28:42PM -0800, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote: > uC is a component of the GT, so it makes sense for the uC debugfs files > to be in the GT folder. A subfolder has been used to keep the same > structure we have for the code. Can we please document the interface changes. I see there are some differences between the original and the new interfaces. > +#define DEFINE_UC_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE(__name) \ > + static int __name ## _open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) \ > +{ \ > + return single_open(file, __name ## _show, inode->i_private); \ > +} \ > +static const struct file_operations __name ## _fops = { \ > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, \ > + .open = __name ## _open, \ > + .read = seq_read, \ > + .llseek = seq_lseek, \ > + .release = single_release, \ > +} Why do we need DEFINE_UC_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE()? DEFINE_GT_DEBUGFS_ATTRIBUTE() was meant to be common to all gt debugfs. I there any reason we need a new one? > +struct debugfs_uc_file { > + const char *name; > + const struct file_operations *fops; > +}; > + > +#define debugfs_uc_register_files(files__, root__, data__) \ > +do { \ > + int i__ = 0; \ > + for (i__ = 0; i__ < ARRAY_SIZE(files__); i__++) { \ > + debugfs_create_file(files__[i__].name, \ > + 0444, root__, data__, \ > + files__[i__].fops); \ > + } \ > +} while (0) You want to define your own debugfs_uc_register_files() instead of using debugfs_gt_register_files() because you want "data__" to be void, right? I think we can achieve that by adding a wrapper in debugfs_gt.c, perhaps we can do something like: void __debugfs_gt_register_files(struct intel_gt *gt, struct dentry *root, const struct debugfs_gt_file *files, void *data, unsigned long count) { ...... } and #define debugfs_gt_register_files(...) __debugfs_gt_register_files(...) #define debugfs_uc_register_files(...) __debugfs_gt_register_files(...) so that we can keep everything in a library. What do you think. Thanks, Andi _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx