linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, Linux PCI <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@intel.com>,
	Vishal L Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>,
	"Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
	Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 17:42:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4iueMDPxcEuLg=NKydkRL+xmEn-udHjKYB493iTQShaAg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4h4z9Y_Zbzk_jiZXs6+gPAbdw0UJHW5NvTaM2ZcvJ6ftw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 5:18 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron
> <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 07:30:47 -0700
> > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In preparation for sharing cxl.h with other generic CXL consumers,
> > > move / consolidate some of the memory device specifics to mem.h.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Would be good to see something in this patch description saying
> > why you chose to have mem.h rather than push the defines down
> > into mem.c (which from the current code + patch set looks like
> > the more logical thing to do).
>
> The main motivation was least privilege access to memory-device
> details, so they had to move out of cxl.h. As to why move them in to a
> new mem.h instead of piling more into mem.c that's just a personal
> organizational style choice to aid review. I tend to go to headers
> first and read data structure definitions before reading the
> implementation, and having that all in one place is cleaner than
> interspersed with implementation details in the C code. It's all still
> private to drivers/cxl/ so I don't see any "least privilege" concerns
> with moving it there.
>
> Does that satisfy your concern?
>
> If yes, I'll add the above to v3.

Oh, another thing it helps is the information content of diffstats to
distinguish definition changes from implementation development.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-14  0:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-01 14:30 [PATCH v2 0/8] CXL Port Enumeration Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h Dan Williams
2021-04-06 16:38   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-14  0:18     ` Dan Williams
2021-04-14  0:42       ` Dan Williams [this message]
2021-04-14  9:21         ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] cxl/mem: Introduce 'struct cxl_regs' for "composable" CXL devices Dan Williams
2021-04-06 17:00   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-14  0:40     ` Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:30 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] cxl/core: Rename bus.c to core.c Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] cxl/core: Refactor CXL register lookup for bridge reuse Dan Williams
2021-04-06 17:00   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-15 20:53     ` Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] cxl/acpi: Introduce ACPI0017 driver and cxl_root Dan Williams
2021-04-01 21:34   ` kernel test robot
2021-04-06 17:32   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-15 15:00     ` Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] cxl/Kconfig: Default drivers to CONFIG_CXL_BUS Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] cxl/port: Introduce cxl_port objects Dan Williams
2021-04-06 17:44   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-04-08 22:42   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-04-09  2:13     ` Dan Williams
2021-04-13 17:18       ` Dan Williams
2021-04-14  1:14       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-04-15  5:21         ` Dan Williams
2021-04-01 14:31 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] cxl/acpi: Add module parameters to stand in for ACPI tables Dan Williams

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='CAPcyv4iueMDPxcEuLg=NKydkRL+xmEn-udHjKYB493iTQShaAg@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
    --cc=ben.widawsky@intel.com \
    --cc=ira.weiny@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h' \
    /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: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).