Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200619050619.266888-1-leobras.c@gmail.com> <20200619050619.266888-4-leobras.c@gmail.com>
 <51201582-efe5-85df-7e65-a998e91ab63f@ozlabs.ru> <ccf7b591f2bf61ba4705699b2e2b050c3cf48d99.camel@gmail.com>
 <887bf30e-ae9e-b0cb-0388-dc555692ff0a@ozlabs.ru>
In-Reply-To: <887bf30e-ae9e-b0cb-0388-dc555692ff0a@ozlabs.ru>
From:   "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:33:03 +1000
Message-ID: <CAOSf1CEC-tYH1so5b4P7dQ7s8v1o4qy_u5CG7LKtKNnRQvC4-w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] powerpc/pseries/iommu: Move window-removing part of
 remove_ddw into remove_dma_window
To:     Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru>
Cc:     Leonardo Bras <leobras.c@gmail.com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
        Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com>,
        Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 11:12 AM Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@ozlabs.ru> wrote:
>
> On 23/06/2020 04:59, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> >
> >> Also, despite this particular file, the "pdn" name is usually used for
> >> struct pci_dn (not device_node), let's keep it that way.
> >
> > Sure, I got confused for some time about this, as we have:
> > static u64 enable_ddw(struct pci_dev *dev, struct device_node *pdn).
> > but on *_ddw() we have "struct pci_dn *pdn".
>
> True again, not the cleanest style here.
>
>
> > I will also add a patch that renames those 'struct device_node *pdn' to
> > something like 'struct device_node *parent_dn'.

I usually go with "np" or "node". In this case I'd use "parent_np" or
just "parent." As you said pci_dn conventionally uses pdn so that
should be avoided if at all possible. There's some places that just
use "dn" for device_node, but I don't think that's something we should
encourage due to how similar it is to pdn.

> I would not go that far, we (well, Oliver) are getting rid of many
> occurrences of pci_dn and Oliver may have a stronger opinion here.

I'm trying to remove the use of pci_dn from non-RTAS platforms which
doesn't apply to pseries. For RTAS platforms having pci_dn sort of
makes sense since it's used to cache data from the device_node and
having it saves you from needing to parse and validate the DT at
runtime since we're supposed to be relying on the FW provided settings
in the DT. I want to get rid of it on PowerNV because it's become a
dumping ground for random bits and pieces of platform specific data.
It's confusing at best and IMO it duplicates a lot of what's already
available in the per-PHB structures which the platform specific stuff
should actually be looking at.

Oliver