mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
	kwilczynski@kernel.org, shawn.lin@rock-chips.com,
	heiko@sntech.de, robh@kernel.org,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: rockchip: Remove redundant PCIe message routing definitions
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 23:58:53 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4bfc8c05-c6e6-4246-960c-ee5802840523@163.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250620154202.GA1292011@bhelgaas>



On 2025/6/20 23:42, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2025 at 11:49:13PM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
>> The Rockchip driver contained duplicated message routing and INTx code
>> definitions (e.g., ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_TO_RC,
>> ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTA). These are already provided by the
>> PCI core in drivers/pci/pci.h as PCIE_MSG_TYPE_R_RC and
>> PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTA, respectively.
>>
>> Remove the driver-specific definitions and use the common PCIe macros
>> instead. This aligns the driver with the PCIe specification and reduces
>> maintenance overhead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h | 14 --------------
>>   1 file changed, 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h
>> index 5864a20323f2..12bc8da59d73 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h
>> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pcie-rockchip.h
>> @@ -215,20 +215,6 @@
>>   #define RC_REGION_0_TYPE_MASK			GENMASK(3, 0)
>>   #define MAX_AXI_WRAPPER_REGION_NUM		33
>>   
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_TO_RC		0x0
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_VIA_ADDR		0x1
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_VIA_ID		0x2
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_BROADCAST		0x3
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_LOCAL_INTX		0x4
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_PME_ACK		0x5
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTA		0x20
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTB		0x21
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTC		0x22
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_ASSERT_INTD		0x23
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_DEASSERT_INTA		0x24
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_DEASSERT_INTB		0x25
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_DEASSERT_INTC		0x26
>> -#define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_CODE_DEASSERT_INTD		0x27
> 
> Thanks for doing this!  In fact, these definitions are not only
> redundant, they're not even used at all.
> 
>>   #define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_MASK			GENMASK(7, 5)
>>   #define ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING(route) \
>>   	(((route) << 5) & ROCKCHIP_PCIE_MSG_ROUTING_MASK)
> 
> And neither are these ROUTING and CODE definitions.

Dear Bjorn,

Yes, this driver has too many unused definitions. I can delete the other 
unused definitions next. For this series, I just delete the similar 
macro definitions in drivers/pci/pci.h.

Best regards,
Hans


  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-20 15:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-07 15:49 [PATCH 0/2] PCI: Consolidate PCIe message routing definitions and remove driver-specific duplicates Hans Zhang
2025-06-07 15:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] PCI: cadence: Replace private message routing enums with PCI core definitions Hans Zhang
2025-06-07 15:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] PCI: rockchip: Remove redundant PCIe message routing definitions Hans Zhang
2025-06-20 15:42   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2025-06-20 15:58     ` Hans Zhang [this message]
2025-06-19 12:52 ` (subset) [PATCH 0/2] PCI: Consolidate PCIe message routing definitions and remove driver-specific duplicates Manivannan Sadhasivam
2025-06-19 12:56 ` Manivannan Sadhasivam

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=4bfc8c05-c6e6-4246-960c-ee5802840523@163.com \
    --to=18255117159@163.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=kwilczynski@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lpieralisi@kernel.org \
    --cc=robh@kernel.org \
    --cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®