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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, 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 1627FC2D0E4 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:10:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (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 27D86206D9 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:10:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 27D86206D9 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=bwidawsk.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:38962 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khhSB-0001dr-7V for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:10:31 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46034) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khhRK-0001B4-1z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:09:38 -0500 Received: from zangief.bwidawsk.net ([107.170.211.233]:54236 helo=mail.bwidawsk.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khhRI-0001Jf-C6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 18:09:37 -0500 Received: by mail.bwidawsk.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id D8BEA122C6A; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:09:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.bwidawsk.net (c-73-37-61-164.hsd1.or.comcast.net [73.37.61.164]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.bwidawsk.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 465A7122C3F; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:09:30 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:09:28 -0800 From: Ben Widawsky To: Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/25] hw/cxl/component: Introduce CXL components (8.1.x, 8.2.5) Message-ID: <20201124230928.zf6uli3dl7levn72@mail.bwidawsk.net> References: <20201111054724.794888-1-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <20201111054724.794888-4-ben.widawsky@intel.com> <20201116120352.00004f25@Huawei.com> <20201116191936.nhchktyrnc5ijoue@intel.com> <20201117122940.00002902@Huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201117122940.00002902@Huawei.com> Received-SPF: none client-ip=107.170.211.233; envelope-from=ben@bwidawsk.net; helo=mail.bwidawsk.net X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.4, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Vishal Verma , Dan Williams , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 20-11-17 12:29:40, Jonathan Cameron wrote: [snip] > > > > > > > + > > > > +/* 8.2.5.10 - CXL Security Capability Structure */ > > > > +#define CXL_SEC_REGISTERS_OFFSET (CXL_RAS_REGISTERS_OFFSET + CXL_RAS_REGISTERS_SIZE) > > > > +#define CXL_SEC_REGISTERS_SIZE 0 /* We don't implement 1.1 downstream ports */ > > > > + > > > > +/* 8.2.5.11 - CXL Link Capability Structure */ > > > > +#define CXL_LINK_REGISTERS_OFFSET (CXL_SEC_REGISTERS_OFFSET + CXL_SEC_REGISTERS_SIZE) > > > > +#define CXL_LINK_REGISTERS_SIZE 0x38 > > > > > > Bit odd to introduce this but not define anything... Can't we bring these > > > in when we need them later? > > > > Repeating my comment from 00/25... > > > > For this specific patch series I liked providing #defines in bulk so that it's > > easy enough to just bring up the spec and review them. Not sure if there is a > > preference from others in the community on this. > > Personally I'd prefer to see the lot if you are going to do that, on basis > should only need reviewing against the spec once. > Not sure others will agree though as "the lot" is an awful lot. > I took a shot at stripping some of this out, but it turns out I already use all of it for the cxl-component-utils. While some of them aren't directly used, the space reservations for the various caps make sense here IMO. So for v2, I'm going to leave this as is, and if there is a desire to do things differently, I think I'd need a suggestion of how to do so. [snip] > > Thanks, > > Jonathan >