lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/13] [RFC] ipath basic headers
From
Date
> > + * $Id: ipath_common.h 4491 2005-12-15 22:20:31Z rjwalsh $
>
> please remove RCSIDs everywhere.

These are everywhere in the OpenIB code. I was actually asked by one of
the OpenIB developers to include them. I'm happy to remove them again,
but what do the OpenIB folks think?

> > +#define yield() sched_yield()
>
> Please push this out. It's fine if they reuse kernel-code in userspace
> this way, but please move the compat wrappers to a separate file that's
> not in the kernel tree.

I will do this.

> > +typedef uint8_t ipath_type;
>
> totally meaningless typedef

In what way?

> > +#ifndef _BITS_PER_BYTE
> > +#define _BITS_PER_BYTE 8
> > +#endif
>
> WTF?

Hmm. That is odd. I'll ask the folks here if we can remove this.

> in kernel land we __inline__ includes always_inline. Also no need for
> a separate prototype for a just following inline function.

Fine.

> > +{
> > + void *ssv, *dsv;
> > + uint32_t csv;
> > + __asm__ __volatile__("cld\n\trep\n\tmovsb":"=&c"(csv), "=&D"(dsv),
> > + "=&S"(ssv)
> > + :"0"(cnt), "1"(dest), "2"(src)
> > + :"memory");
> > +}
>
> No way we're gonna put assembler code into such a driver.

Why not? The chip (and therefore the driver) only works with Opterons.
It's tied to the HT bus, but PCI or anything like that.

> > +struct ipath_int_vec {
> > + int long long addr;
> > + uint32_t info;
> > +};
>
>
> please always used fixes-size types for user communication.

OK.

> also please
> avoid ioctls like the rest of the IB codebase.

More complex, but I'll look into it.

> > +/* Similarly, this is the kernel version going back to the user. It's slightly
> > + * different, in that we want to tell if the driver was built as part of a
> > + * PathScale release, or from the driver from the OpenIB, kernel.org, or a
> > + * standard distribution, for support reasons. The high bit is 0 for
> > + * non-PathScale, and 1 for PathScale-built/supplied. That bit is defined
> > + * in Makefiles, rather than this file.
> > + *
> > + * It's returned by the driver to the user code during initialization
> > + * in the spi_sw_version field of ipath_base_info, so the user code can
> > + * in turn check for compatibility with the kernel.
> > +*/
> > +#define IPATH_KERN_SWVERSION ((IPATH_KERN_TYPE<<31) | IPATH_USER_SWVERSION)
>
> NACK, there's no way we're gonna put in a way to identify an "official"
> version. The official version is the last one in mainline always.

Why make this hard for vendors? You may only care about the latest
mainline, but if we want to sell chips, we have to support this all the
way back to 2.6.9 (RHEL).

> > +#ifndef PCI_VENDOR_ID_PATHSCALE /* not in pci.ids yet */
> > +#define PCI_VENDOR_ID_PATHSCALE 0x1fc1
> > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_PATHSCALE_INFINIPATH1 0xa
> > +#define PCI_DEVICE_ID_PATHSCALE_INFINIPATH2 0xd
> > +#endif
>
> so move it there?

Sounds like a good idea. I'll submit a separate patch.

> > +typedef struct _ipath_portdata {
>
> please avoid typedefs for struct types.

I thought I had, but I must have missed this one.

> > +/*
> > + * these should be somewhat dynamic someday, although they are fixed
> > + * for all users of the device on any given load.
> > + *
> > + * NOTE: There is a VM bug in the 2.4 Kernels similar to the one Dave
> > + * fixed in the 2.6 Kernel. When using large or discontinuous memory,
> > + * we get random kernel oops. So, in 2.4, we are just going to stick
> > + * with 4k chunks instead of 64k chunks.
> > + */
>
> No one cares about 2.4 kernels here.

Fine.

> > + * these function similarly to the mlock/munlock system calls.
> > + * ipath_mlock() is used to pin an address range (if not already pinned),
> > + * and optionally return the list of physical addresses
> > + * ipath_munlock() does the obvious, and ipath_mlock() cleans up all
> > + * private memory, used at driver unload.
> > + * ipath_mlock_nocopy() is similar to mlock, but only one page, and marks
> > + * the vm so the page isn't taken away on a fork.
> > + */
> > +int ipath_mlock(unsigned long, size_t, struct page **);
> > +int ipath_mlock_nocopy(unsigned long, struct page **);
>
> this kind of thing definitly doesn't belong into an LLDD. or maybe
> it's just stale prototypes?

No - they're used. Why do you say they don't belong?

> > +#ifdef IPATH_COSIM
> > +extern __u32 sim_readl(const volatile void __iomem * addr);
> > +extern __u64 sim_readq(const volatile void __iomem * addr);
> > +extern void sim_writel(__u32 val, volatile void __iomem * addr);
> > +extern void sim_writeq(__u64 val, volatile void __iomem * addr);
> > +#define ipath_readl(addr) sim_readl(addr)
> > +#define ipath_readq(addr) sim_readq(addr)
> > +#define ipath_writel(val, addr) sim_writel(val, addr)
> > +#define ipath_writeq(val, addr) sim_writeq(val, addr)
> > +#else
> > +#define ipath_readl(addr) readl(addr)
> > +#define ipath_readq(addr) readq(addr)
> > +#define ipath_writel(val, addr) writel(val, addr)
> > +#define ipath_writeq(val, addr) writeq(val, addr)
> > +#endif
>
> Please use the proper functions directly. Your simulator can override
> them if nessecary.

Fine.

> > +static __inline__ uint32_t ipath_kget_kreg32(const ipath_type stype,
> > + ipath_kreg regno)
> > +{
> > + volatile uint32_t *kreg32;
> > +
> > + if (!devdata[stype].ipath_kregbase)
> > + return ~0;
> > +
> > + kreg32 = (volatile uint32_t *)&devdata[stype].ipath_kregbase[regno];
>
> volatile use is probably always wrong. but this whole functions looks like
> a very odd wrapper anyway?

The volatile is there so the compiler doesn't optimize away the read.
This is important, because reads of our hardware have side-effects and
cannot be optimized out.

Regards,
Robert.

--
Robert Walsh Email: rjwalsh@pathscale.com
PathScale, Inc. Phone: +1 650 934 8117
2071 Stierlin Court, Suite 200 Fax: +1 650 428 1969
Mountain View, CA 94043.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-12-17 23:24    [W:0.136 / U:8.608 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site