Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] cxl/pci: Rename DOE mailbox handle to doe_mb

From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Robert Richter <rrichter@amd.com>
Cc: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
	"Davidlohr Bueso" <dave@stgolabs.net>,
	<linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] cxl/pci: Rename DOE mailbox handle to doe_mb
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 16:07:25 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240126160725.00006dba@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240108114833.241710-2-rrichter@amd.com>

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:48:31 +0100
Robert Richter <rrichter@amd.com> wrote:

> Trivial variable rename for the DOE mailbox handle from cdat_doe to
> doe_mb. The variable name cdat_doe is too ambiguous, use doe_mb that
> is commonly used for the mailbox.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@amd.com>

I don't feel strongly about this one either way, but I've probably spent
too long looking at this code in the past.

Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

> ---
>  drivers/cxl/core/pci.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> index 6c9c8d92f8f7..89bab00bb291 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/pci.c
> @@ -518,14 +518,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(cxl_hdm_decode_init, CXL);
>  	 FIELD_PREP(CXL_DOE_TABLE_ACCESS_ENTRY_HANDLE, (entry_handle)))
>  
>  static int cxl_cdat_get_length(struct device *dev,
> -			       struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe,
> +			       struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb,
>  			       size_t *length)
>  {
>  	__le32 request = CDAT_DOE_REQ(0);
>  	__le32 response[2];
>  	int rc;
>  
> -	rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
> +	rc = pci_doe(doe_mb, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
>  		     CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS,
>  		     &request, sizeof(request),
>  		     &response, sizeof(response));
> @@ -543,7 +543,7 @@ static int cxl_cdat_get_length(struct device *dev,
>  }
>  
>  static int cxl_cdat_read_table(struct device *dev,
> -			       struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe,
> +			       struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb,
>  			       void *cdat_table, size_t *cdat_length)
>  {
>  	size_t length = *cdat_length + sizeof(__le32);
> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ static int cxl_cdat_read_table(struct device *dev,
>  		size_t entry_dw;
>  		int rc;
>  
> -		rc = pci_doe(cdat_doe, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
> +		rc = pci_doe(doe_mb, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
>  			     CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS,
>  			     &request, sizeof(request),
>  			     data, length);
> @@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port)
>  {
>  	struct device *uport = port->uport_dev;
>  	struct device *dev = &port->dev;
> -	struct pci_doe_mb *cdat_doe;
> +	struct pci_doe_mb *doe_mb;
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = NULL;
>  	struct cxl_memdev *cxlmd;
>  	size_t cdat_length;
> @@ -638,16 +638,16 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port)
>  	if (!pdev)
>  		return;
>  
> -	cdat_doe = pci_find_doe_mailbox(pdev, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
> -					CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS);
> -	if (!cdat_doe) {
> +	doe_mb = pci_find_doe_mailbox(pdev, PCI_DVSEC_VENDOR_ID_CXL,
> +				      CXL_DOE_PROTOCOL_TABLE_ACCESS);
> +	if (!doe_mb) {
>  		dev_dbg(dev, "No CDAT mailbox\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
>  
>  	port->cdat_available = true;
>  
> -	if (cxl_cdat_get_length(dev, cdat_doe, &cdat_length)) {
> +	if (cxl_cdat_get_length(dev, doe_mb, &cdat_length)) {
>  		dev_dbg(dev, "No CDAT length\n");
>  		return;
>  	}
> @@ -656,7 +656,7 @@ void read_cdat_data(struct cxl_port *port)
>  	if (!cdat_buf)
>  		return;
>  
> -	rc = cxl_cdat_read_table(dev, cdat_doe, cdat_buf, &cdat_length);
> +	rc = cxl_cdat_read_table(dev, doe_mb, cdat_buf, &cdat_length);
>  	if (rc)
>  		goto err;
>  