Re: [PATCH] PCI: pcie-rcar: Cache PHY init function pointer

[Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>]

On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 04:33:40PM +0100, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 12:22:13PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > Hi Lorenzo,
> > 
> > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 11:19 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
> > <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 11:02:31AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > > On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 10:57 AM Lorenzo Pieralisi
> > > > <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 08:35:04PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > On 5/5/20 8:02 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 10:42:06PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > >> On 4/28/20 10:32 AM, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
> > > > > > >>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 02:31:47PM +0200, marek.vasut@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > >>>> From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> The PHY initialization function pointer does not change during the
> > > > > > >>>> lifetime of the driver instance, it is therefore sufficient to get
> > > > > > >>>> the pointer in .probe(), cache it in driver private data, and just
> > > > > > >>>> call the function through the cached pointer in .resume().
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
> > > > > > >>>> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
> > > > > > >>>> ---
> > > > > > >>>> NOTE: Based on git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lpieralisi/pci.git
> > > > > > >>>>       branch pci/rcar
> > > > > > >>>> NOTE: The driver tag is now 'pcie-rcar' to distinguish it from pci-rcar-gen2.c
> > > > > > >>>> ---
> > > > > > >>>>  drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rcar.c | 10 ++++------
> > > > > > >>>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Squashed in https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11438665
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Do you want me to rename the $SUBJECT (and the branch name while at it)
> > > > > > >>> in the patches in my pci/rcar branch ("PCI: pcie-rcar: ...") to start
> > > > > > >>> the commit subject tag renaming from this cycle (and in the interim you
> > > > > > >>> send a rename for the drivers files ?)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I don't really have a particular preference either way. I can keep
> > > > > > >> marking the drivers with pcie-rcar and pci-rcar tags if that helps
> > > > > > >> discern them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - "rcar" for the PCIe driver
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wouldn't it be better to mark this rcar-pcie , so it's clear it's the
> > > > > > PCIe driver ?
> > > > >
> > > > > All other drivers in drivers/pci/controller are PCIe but don't require
> > > > > an extra tag to clarify it - that's the rationale behind "rcar".
> > > > >
> > > > > How does that sound ?
> > > >
> > > > Are there any other platforms that have two different drivers for the same
> > > > platform, one for PCI, and one for PCIe?
> > >
> > > I don't think so - nonetheless it's time we agreed on something and be
> > > done with it. Bjorn expressed his opinion on this and unless we have a
> > > compelling reason not to follow it IMO it'd be better to take it.
> > >
> > > I don't think using rcar-pcie is a disaster either.
> > >
> > > Let me know how you want to proceed, thanks.
> > 
> > /me has just returned from a bike ride, so it's time for a bike-shed
> > 
> > "PCI: rcar:" for pcie-rcar.c, "PCI: rcar-gen2:" (or "PCI: rcar2"?) for
> > pci-rcar-gen2.c?
> 
> Fine by me, all agreed ?

Sounds good to me.