From: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org> To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, bin.meng@windriver.com, mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk, jcd@tribudubois.net, qemu-block@nongnu.org, andrew.smirnov@gmail.com, hskinnemoen@google.com, joel@jms.id.au, atar4qemu@gmail.com, alistair@alistair23.me, b.galvani@gmail.com, nieklinnenbank@gmail.com, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, clg@kaod.org, kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-riscv@nongnu.org, andrew@aj.id.au, Andrew.Baumann@microsoft.com, sundeep.lkml@gmail.com, kfting@nuvoton.com, hreitz@redhat.com, palmer@dabbelt.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] hw: Replace drive_get_next() by drive_get() Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 14:59:51 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <5b799ad5-a552-454f-dcc7-1ea6de22b397@amsat.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211115125536.3341681-3-armbru@redhat.com> On 11/15/21 13:55, Markus Armbruster wrote: > drive_get_next() is basically a bad idea. It returns the "next" block > backend of a certain interface type. "Next" means bus=0,unit=N, where > subsequent calls count N up from zero, per interface type. > > This lets you define unit numbers implicitly by execution order. If the > order changes, or new calls appear "in the middle", unit numbers change. > ABI break. Hard to spot in review. > > Explicit is better than implicit: use drive_get() directly. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> > --- > include/sysemu/blockdev.h | 1 - > blockdev.c | 10 ---------- > hw/arm/aspeed.c | 21 +++++++++++++-------- > hw/arm/cubieboard.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/integratorcp.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/mcimx6ul-evk.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/mcimx7d-sabre.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/msf2-som.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/npcm7xx_boards.c | 6 +++--- > hw/arm/orangepi.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/raspi.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/realview.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/sabrelite.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/versatilepb.c | 4 ++-- > hw/arm/vexpress.c | 6 +++--- > hw/arm/xilinx_zynq.c | 16 +++++++++------- > hw/arm/xlnx-versal-virt.c | 3 ++- > hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 6 +++--- > hw/microblaze/petalogix_ml605_mmu.c | 2 +- > hw/misc/sifive_u_otp.c | 2 +- > hw/riscv/microchip_pfsoc.c | 2 +- > hw/sparc64/niagara.c | 2 +- > 23 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > @@ -435,11 +438,13 @@ static void aspeed_machine_init(MachineState *machine) > } > > for (i = 0; i < bmc->soc.sdhci.num_slots; i++) { > - sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.sdhci.slots[i], drive_get_next(IF_SD)); > + sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.sdhci.slots[i], > + drive_get(IF_SD, 0, i)); If we put SD on bus #0, ... > } > > if (bmc->soc.emmc.num_slots) { > - sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.emmc.slots[0], drive_get_next(IF_SD)); > + sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.emmc.slots[0], > + drive_get(IF_SD, 0, bmc->soc.sdhci.num_slots)); ... we'd want to put eMMC on bus #1, but I see having eMMC cards on a IF_SD bus as a bug, since these cards are soldered on the board. > --- a/hw/arm/vexpress.c > +++ b/hw/arm/vexpress.c > @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ static void vexpress_common_init(MachineState *machine) > qdev_get_gpio_in(sysctl, ARM_SYSCTL_GPIO_MMC_WPROT)); > qdev_connect_gpio_out_named(dev, "card-inserted", 0, > qdev_get_gpio_in(sysctl, ARM_SYSCTL_GPIO_MMC_CARDIN)); > - dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_SD); > + dinfo = drive_get(IF_SD, 0, 0); Can we have one interface refactor per patch (IF_SD, IF_PFLASH, IF_MTD...)? > @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ static void vexpress_common_init(MachineState *machine) > > sysbus_create_simple("pl111", map[VE_CLCD], pic[14]); > > - dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_PFLASH); > + dinfo = drive_get(IF_PFLASH, 0, 0); > -static inline void zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > - bool is_qspi) > +static inline int zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > + bool is_qspi, int unit0) > { > + int unit = unit0; > DeviceState *dev; > SysBusDevice *busdev; > SSIBus *spi; > @@ -156,7 +157,7 @@ static inline void zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > spi = (SSIBus *)qdev_get_child_bus(dev, bus_name); > > for (j = 0; j < num_ss; ++j) { > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, unit++); > diff --git a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > index 3dc2b5e8ca..45eb19ab3b 100644 > --- a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > +++ b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_init(MachineState *machine) > BusState *spi_bus; > DeviceState *flash_dev; > qemu_irq cs_line; > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, i); If this is bus #0, ... > gchar *bus_name = g_strdup_printf("spi%d", i); > > spi_bus = qdev_get_child_bus(DEVICE(&s->soc), bus_name); > @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_init(MachineState *machine) > BusState *spi_bus; > DeviceState *flash_dev; > qemu_irq cs_line; > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_SPIS + i); ... I'd expect we use bus #1 here (different connector on the board). > int bus = i / XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_QSPI_BUS_CS; > gchar *bus_name = g_strdup_printf("qspi%d", bus);
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org> To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, bin.meng@windriver.com, mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk, sundeep.lkml@gmail.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org, andrew.smirnov@gmail.com, hskinnemoen@google.com, joel@jms.id.au, atar4qemu@gmail.com, alistair@alistair23.me, b.galvani@gmail.com, nieklinnenbank@gmail.com, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, clg@kaod.org, kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-riscv@nongnu.org, andrew@aj.id.au, Andrew.Baumann@microsoft.com, jcd@tribudubois.net, kfting@nuvoton.com, hreitz@redhat.com, palmer@dabbelt.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] hw: Replace drive_get_next() by drive_get() Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2021 14:59:51 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <5b799ad5-a552-454f-dcc7-1ea6de22b397@amsat.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20211115125536.3341681-3-armbru@redhat.com> On 11/15/21 13:55, Markus Armbruster wrote: > drive_get_next() is basically a bad idea. It returns the "next" block > backend of a certain interface type. "Next" means bus=0,unit=N, where > subsequent calls count N up from zero, per interface type. > > This lets you define unit numbers implicitly by execution order. If the > order changes, or new calls appear "in the middle", unit numbers change. > ABI break. Hard to spot in review. > > Explicit is better than implicit: use drive_get() directly. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> > --- > include/sysemu/blockdev.h | 1 - > blockdev.c | 10 ---------- > hw/arm/aspeed.c | 21 +++++++++++++-------- > hw/arm/cubieboard.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/imx25_pdk.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/integratorcp.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/mcimx6ul-evk.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/mcimx7d-sabre.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/msf2-som.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/npcm7xx_boards.c | 6 +++--- > hw/arm/orangepi.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/raspi.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/realview.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/sabrelite.c | 2 +- > hw/arm/versatilepb.c | 4 ++-- > hw/arm/vexpress.c | 6 +++--- > hw/arm/xilinx_zynq.c | 16 +++++++++------- > hw/arm/xlnx-versal-virt.c | 3 ++- > hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 6 +++--- > hw/microblaze/petalogix_ml605_mmu.c | 2 +- > hw/misc/sifive_u_otp.c | 2 +- > hw/riscv/microchip_pfsoc.c | 2 +- > hw/sparc64/niagara.c | 2 +- > 23 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-) > @@ -435,11 +438,13 @@ static void aspeed_machine_init(MachineState *machine) > } > > for (i = 0; i < bmc->soc.sdhci.num_slots; i++) { > - sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.sdhci.slots[i], drive_get_next(IF_SD)); > + sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.sdhci.slots[i], > + drive_get(IF_SD, 0, i)); If we put SD on bus #0, ... > } > > if (bmc->soc.emmc.num_slots) { > - sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.emmc.slots[0], drive_get_next(IF_SD)); > + sdhci_attach_drive(&bmc->soc.emmc.slots[0], > + drive_get(IF_SD, 0, bmc->soc.sdhci.num_slots)); ... we'd want to put eMMC on bus #1, but I see having eMMC cards on a IF_SD bus as a bug, since these cards are soldered on the board. > --- a/hw/arm/vexpress.c > +++ b/hw/arm/vexpress.c > @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ static void vexpress_common_init(MachineState *machine) > qdev_get_gpio_in(sysctl, ARM_SYSCTL_GPIO_MMC_WPROT)); > qdev_connect_gpio_out_named(dev, "card-inserted", 0, > qdev_get_gpio_in(sysctl, ARM_SYSCTL_GPIO_MMC_CARDIN)); > - dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_SD); > + dinfo = drive_get(IF_SD, 0, 0); Can we have one interface refactor per patch (IF_SD, IF_PFLASH, IF_MTD...)? > @@ -657,7 +657,7 @@ static void vexpress_common_init(MachineState *machine) > > sysbus_create_simple("pl111", map[VE_CLCD], pic[14]); > > - dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_PFLASH); > + dinfo = drive_get(IF_PFLASH, 0, 0); > -static inline void zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > - bool is_qspi) > +static inline int zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > + bool is_qspi, int unit0) > { > + int unit = unit0; > DeviceState *dev; > SysBusDevice *busdev; > SSIBus *spi; > @@ -156,7 +157,7 @@ static inline void zynq_init_spi_flashes(uint32_t base_addr, qemu_irq irq, > spi = (SSIBus *)qdev_get_child_bus(dev, bus_name); > > for (j = 0; j < num_ss; ++j) { > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, unit++); > diff --git a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > index 3dc2b5e8ca..45eb19ab3b 100644 > --- a/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > +++ b/hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c > @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_init(MachineState *machine) > BusState *spi_bus; > DeviceState *flash_dev; > qemu_irq cs_line; > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, i); If this is bus #0, ... > gchar *bus_name = g_strdup_printf("spi%d", i); > > spi_bus = qdev_get_child_bus(DEVICE(&s->soc), bus_name); > @@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_init(MachineState *machine) > BusState *spi_bus; > DeviceState *flash_dev; > qemu_irq cs_line; > - DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get_next(IF_MTD); > + DriveInfo *dinfo = drive_get(IF_MTD, 0, XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_SPIS + i); ... I'd expect we use bus #1 here (different connector on the board). > int bus = i / XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_QSPI_BUS_CS; > gchar *bus_name = g_strdup_printf("qspi%d", bus);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-15 14:02 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-11-15 12:55 [PATCH RFC 0/2] Eliminate drive_get_next() Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 12:55 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 12:55 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] hw/sd/ssi-sd: Do not create SD card within controller's realize Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 12:55 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 13:40 ` Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 13:40 ` Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 13:48 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 13:48 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 12:55 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] hw: Replace drive_get_next() by drive_get() Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 12:55 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 13:38 ` Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 13:38 ` Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 13:48 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 13:48 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 13:59 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé [this message] 2021-11-15 13:59 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé 2021-11-15 15:57 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 15:57 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 21:15 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé 2021-11-15 21:15 ` Philippe Mathieu-Daudé 2021-11-16 7:47 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-16 7:47 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-16 8:52 ` Cédric Le Goater 2021-11-16 8:52 ` Cédric Le Goater 2021-11-16 9:29 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-16 9:29 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-16 12:14 ` Cédric Le Goater 2021-11-16 12:14 ` Cédric Le Goater 2021-11-15 14:05 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] Eliminate drive_get_next() Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 14:05 ` Peter Maydell 2021-11-15 16:01 ` Markus Armbruster 2021-11-15 16:01 ` Markus Armbruster
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=5b799ad5-a552-454f-dcc7-1ea6de22b397@amsat.org \ --to=f4bug@amsat.org \ --cc=Andrew.Baumann@microsoft.com \ --cc=alistair@alistair23.me \ --cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \ --cc=andrew@aj.id.au \ --cc=armbru@redhat.com \ --cc=atar4qemu@gmail.com \ --cc=b.galvani@gmail.com \ --cc=bin.meng@windriver.com \ --cc=clg@kaod.org \ --cc=hreitz@redhat.com \ --cc=hskinnemoen@google.com \ --cc=jcd@tribudubois.net \ --cc=joel@jms.id.au \ --cc=kfting@nuvoton.com \ --cc=kwolf@redhat.com \ --cc=mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk \ --cc=nieklinnenbank@gmail.com \ --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \ --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \ --cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \ --cc=qemu-block@nongnu.org \ --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \ --cc=qemu-riscv@nongnu.org \ --cc=sundeep.lkml@gmail.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.