On Mon, May 03, 2021 at 01:23:47PM -0500, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 4/28/21 10:48 PM, Shivaprasad G Bhat wrote:
> > The subsequent patches add definitions which tend to
> > get the compilation to cyclic dependency. So, prepare
> > with forward declarations, move the defitions and clean up.
> 
> definitions
> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Shivaprasad G Bhat <sbhat@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >  hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.c         |   12 ++++++++++++
> >  include/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.h |   14 ++------------
> >  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.c b/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.c
> > index b46c36917c..8cf3fb2ffb 100644
> > --- a/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.c
> > +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.c
> > @@ -31,6 +31,18 @@
> >  #include "qemu/range.h"
> >  #include "hw/ppc/spapr_numa.h"
> >  
> > +/*
> > + * The nvdimm size should be aligned to SCM block size.
> > + * The SCM block size should be aligned to SPAPR_MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE
> > + * inorder to have SCM regions not to overlap with dimm memory regions.
> 
> And while at it, even though it is code motion...

It looks like the patch no longer applies clear to ppc-for-6.1, so can
you rebase and fix up Eric's nitpicks at the same time?

> 
> > + * The SCM devices can have variable block sizes. For now, fixing the
> > + * block size to the minimum value.
> > + */
> > +#define SPAPR_MINIMUM_SCM_BLOCK_SIZE SPAPR_MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE
> 
> > +++ b/include/hw/ppc/spapr_nvdimm.h
> > @@ -11,19 +11,9 @@
> >  #define HW_SPAPR_NVDIMM_H
> >  
> >  #include "hw/mem/nvdimm.h"
> > -#include "hw/ppc/spapr.h"
> >  
> > -/*
> > - * The nvdimm size should be aligned to SCM block size.
> > - * The SCM block size should be aligned to SPAPR_MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE
> > - * inorder to have SCM regions not to overlap with dimm memory regions.
> 
> ... this should be "in order"
> 

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson