From: "Cédric Le Goater" <clg@kaod.org> To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, bin.meng@windriver.com, mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, 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, kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-riscv@nongnu.org, andrew@aj.id.au, "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>, 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: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:14:05 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <f5336551-b29c-393f-4047-ed36a1b98f6f@kaod.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87h7ccbg8i.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> On 11/16/21 10:29, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> writes: > >> On 11/15/21 16:57, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> writes: >>> >>>> 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 >>> >>> Using separate buses for different kinds of devices would be neater, but >>> it also would be an incompatible change. This patch keeps existing >>> bus/unit numbers working. drive_get_next() can only use bus 0. >> >> All Aspeed SoCs have 3 SPI busses, each with multiple CS, and also multiple >> sdhci controllers with multiple slots. >> >> How drives are defined for the aspeed machines can/should be improved. >> The machine init iterates on the command line drives, attaches the >> DriveInfo, in the order found, to a m25p80 device model first and then >> follows on with the SD devices. This is fragile clearly and a bus+id >> would be most welcome to identify the drive backend. >> >> May be this is a prereq for this patchset ? > > Such a change will probably be easier to review after this patch, > because then it's just a matter of changing / dumbing down parameters to > drive_get(). ok. > I can't judge whether incompatible change is okay here. It looks ok to me since you are using the number of possible devices of the previous controller as an offset for drive_get(). Thanks, C.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Cédric Le Goater" <clg@kaod.org> To: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> Cc: "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, 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, 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: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:14:05 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <f5336551-b29c-393f-4047-ed36a1b98f6f@kaod.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <87h7ccbg8i.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> On 11/16/21 10:29, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> writes: > >> On 11/15/21 16:57, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> writes: >>> >>>> 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 >>> >>> Using separate buses for different kinds of devices would be neater, but >>> it also would be an incompatible change. This patch keeps existing >>> bus/unit numbers working. drive_get_next() can only use bus 0. >> >> All Aspeed SoCs have 3 SPI busses, each with multiple CS, and also multiple >> sdhci controllers with multiple slots. >> >> How drives are defined for the aspeed machines can/should be improved. >> The machine init iterates on the command line drives, attaches the >> DriveInfo, in the order found, to a m25p80 device model first and then >> follows on with the SD devices. This is fragile clearly and a bus+id >> would be most welcome to identify the drive backend. >> >> May be this is a prereq for this patchset ? > > Such a change will probably be easier to review after this patch, > because then it's just a matter of changing / dumbing down parameters to > drive_get(). ok. > I can't judge whether incompatible change is okay here. It looks ok to me since you are using the number of possible devices of the previous controller as an offset for drive_get(). Thanks, C.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-16 12:15 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 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 [this message] 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=f5336551-b29c-393f-4047-ed36a1b98f6f@kaod.org \ --to=clg@kaod.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=f4bug@amsat.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.