From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=Lr1k=PM=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable
	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 A665AC43387
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri,  4 Jan 2019 08:47:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACB8420665
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri,  4 Jan 2019 08:47:05 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org ACB8420665
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=telegraphics.com.au
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43WJLb0pLHzDqLL
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Fri,  4 Jan 2019 19:47:03 +1100 (AEDT)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=telegraphics.com.au
 (client-ip=98.124.60.144; helo=kvm5.telegraphics.com.au;
 envelope-from=fthain@telegraphics.com.au; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none)
 header.from=telegraphics.com.au
Received: from kvm5.telegraphics.com.au (kvm5.telegraphics.com.au
 [98.124.60.144])
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43WJJr4N4mzDqFS
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Fri,  4 Jan 2019 19:45:32 +1100 (AEDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by kvm5.telegraphics.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id CADF728E5E;
 Fri,  4 Jan 2019 03:45:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 19:45:58 +1100 (AEDT)
From: Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 24/25] powerpc: Adopt nvram module for PPC64
In-Reply-To: <CAK8P3a3OD9ou=y+PaZ03v-ivW4A3fwwzA+aL+CoJDd_L2vTMLA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.21.1901041850170.9@nippy.intranet>
References: <cover.1545784679.git.fthain@telegraphics.com.au>
 <2fe2b8e6395aeacfafcbde590a50922d4e632189.1545784679.git.fthain@telegraphics.com.au>
 <CAK8P3a2p91XJfJuSCZqRLRgC-aP3LR1tMK2DDxTiSuD8_FOg8Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.LNX.2.21.1812301401220.215@nippy.intranet>
 <CAK8P3a3OD9ou=y+PaZ03v-ivW4A3fwwzA+aL+CoJDd_L2vTMLA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
 Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 linux-m68k <linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
 Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>

On Mon, 31 Dec 2018, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 4:29 AM Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 29 Dec 2018, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > > With the current method, it does seem odd to have a single 
> > > per-architecture instance of the exported structure containing 
> > > function pointers. This doesn't give us the flexibility of having 
> > > multiple copies in the kernel the way that ppc_md does, but it adds 
> > > overhead compared to simply exporting the functions directly.
> > >
> >
> > You're right, there is overhead here.
> >
> > With a bit of auditing, wrappers like the one you quoted (which merely 
> > checks whether or not a ppc_md method is implemented) could surely be 
> > avoided.
> >
> > The arch_nvram_ops methods are supposed to optional (that is, they are 
> > allowed to be NULL).
> >
> > We could call exactly the same function pointers though either ppc_md 
> > or arch_nvram_ops. That would avoid the double indirection.
> 
> I think you can have a 'const' structure in the __ro_after_init section, 
> so without changing anything else, powerpc could just copy the function 
> pointers from ppc_md into the arch_nvram_ops at early init time, which 
> should ideally simplify your implementation as well.
> 

Does this require removing the 'const' from the powerpc arch_nvram_ops 
definition? That would mean removing the 'const' from the declaration in 
nvram.h, which means removing 'const' for every other instance of that 
struct too.

That's what happened when I tried removing the ppc_md.nvram_* methods 
entirely and assigning the same function pointers to arch_nvram_ops 
methods instead. Apparently all instances of arch_nvram_ops have to be 
const or none of them. Otherwise gcc says, "error: conflicting type 
qualifiers for 'arch_nvram_ops'".

-- 

>         Arnd
>