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 29EE4C2D0E4 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 05:51:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D7220759 for ; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 05:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726429AbgKOFvC (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Nov 2020 00:51:02 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:40590 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725793AbgKOFvC (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Nov 2020 00:51:02 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id 33so14752945wrl.7 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:51:00 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=0Ar1HS0TIigbtEbbtbsrbeVh6VW06RBSYq0BlrEFWlQ=; b=sgkm1xLOZig6QWGEPSj/OBqZT3xXDgH6/SXFU+Z7XE+E3SICAgmcSN1+mYjg0NTUfF 20KnRF+xgMESjgJXpc1SkSrulnixqMit27XfkUDPgcFqZo7uAJzGDPZ8kMdKVF/KbNzV W4Pwce2yZEdCGLVNmcyDOVc2d408iQJKF1/67EGTQumKdTs7pZ+0DqIOUY7Ueaqh5oLe ZiNBMZVmmoL7ebcLz1qGwD5bXXhValW9gzfI4fcXXxwrw1Er2MLYWta5edReZTxXLxBL SWNJyFQ9QRES3jkAoDr7M6tgtUtF8CNaj4kPHSmoMjKrQIMF4jrC1+Iuy/qL2a2aQjWG XOMw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531hWfZwTjjR6bGAFTbr2vAk/8YyHG6JecpTD/saXqYjdUXxuJsB 1h2I8I16KZv0V3Zg4YEGIOk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyyWlqOi881rwwar8nssPXB4LzlZhjcTUAVcp2Ix24BVuoPkzt7VIFoWPh+xOxI1NRrikiLUw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:345:: with SMTP id e5mr12059182wre.333.1605419460016; Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:51:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from rocinante ([95.155.85.46]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g11sm17547121wrq.7.2020.11.14.21.50.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:50:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 06:50:57 +0100 From: Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= To: Florian Fainelli Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Rob Herring , Jonathan Cameron , Jonathan Chocron , Shawn Lin , Heiko Stuebner , Zhou Wang , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Will Deacon , Robert Richter , Michal Simek , Toan Le , Michael Ellerman , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Thomas Petazzoni , Nicolas Saenz Julienne , Ray Jui , Scott Branden , Jonathan Derrick , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] PCI: Unify ECAM constants in native PCI Express drivers Message-ID: References: <20201005003805.465057-1-kw@linux.com> <429099a8-5186-40c3-f5c0-f219b3e79f01@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <429099a8-5186-40c3-f5c0-f219b3e79f01@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On 20-10-04 19:53:06, Florian Fainelli wrote: Hi Florian, Sorry for taking a long time to get back to you. [...] > This appears to be correct, so: > > Acked-by: Florian Fainelli Thank you! > however, I would have defined a couple of additional helper macros and do: > > idx = PCIE_ECAM_BUS(bus->number) | PCIE_ECAM_DEV(devfn) | > PCIE_ECAM_FUN(devfn); > > for clarity. > [...] > For instance, adding these two: > > #define PCIE_ECAM_DEV(x) (((x) & 0x1f) << PCIE_ECAM_DEV_SHIFT) > #define PCIE_ECAM_FUN(x) (((x) & 0x7) << PCIE_ECAM_FUN_SHIFT) > > may be clearer for use in drivers like pcie-brcmstb.c that used to treat the > device function in terms of device and function (though it was called slot > there). Regarding the suggestion above - it has been like that initially, albeit Bjorn suggested that there is no need to reply on the macros that use PCI_SLOT() and PCI_FUNC() macros, see: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pci/20200922232715.GA2238688@bjorn-Precision-5520/ I would be happy to put the macros back if there is a value in having the extra macros added - perhaps for clarify, as you suggest. Krzysztof