LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Bryan O'Donoghue" <pure.logic@nexus-software.ie>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, dvhart@infradead.org, boon.leong.ong@intel.com,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86: Add Isolated Memory Regions for Quark X1000
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 01:27:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <54C05207.6010306@nexus-software.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VfNzXo=gkOhjkEGn+bSqk2kr+hOD_5PNxq4CsLjOqtG=w@mail.gmail.com>

On 21/01/15 20:57, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> Few nitpicks and comments below.
>
>> +/*
>> + * IMR agent access mask bits
>> + * See section 12.7.4.7 from quark-x1000-datasheet.pdf for register
>> + * definitions
>
> What about dots at the end of sentences?

Murphy's law says - no matter how many times you proof read for full 
stop you'll miss at least one :)

>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "imr: " fmt
>
> Maybe more usual
> #define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt

Sure.

>> +       ret = iosf_mbi_read(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_READ,
>> +                               reg++, &imr->rmask);
>> +       if (ret)
>> +               return ret;
>> +
>> +       return iosf_mbi_read(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_READ,
>> +                               reg, &imr->wmask);
>
> I would keep this in the same style like
> ret =
> if (ret)
>   return ret;
>
> return 0;
>
> It might be easy to extend if needed, though it's a really minor change.

No problem

>> +
>> +       ret = iosf_mbi_write(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_WRITE,
>> +                               reg++, imr->rmask);
>> +       if (ret)
>> +               goto done;
>> +
>> +       ret = iosf_mbi_write(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_WRITE,
>> +                               reg, imr->wmask);
>
> Wouldn't be reg++ here as well? Below you substitute full offset which
> I think points just to next register.

I don't think we want to increment below..

>
>> +       if (ret)
>> +               goto done;
>> +
>> +       /* Lock bit must be set separately to addr_lo address bits */
>> +       if (lock) {
>> +               imr->addr_lo |= IMR_LOCK;
>> +               ret = iosf_mbi_write(QRK_MBI_UNIT_MM, QRK_MBI_MM_WRITE,
>> +                                       reg - IMR_LOCK_OFF, imr->addr_lo);
>> +       }

..because we calculate an offset anyway. An additional increment would 
just be unnecessary cycles.

>
> Could it fit one line less?

Yes. Will change.

>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
>> +/**
>> + * imr_dbgfs_state_show
>> + * Print state of IMR registers
>> + *
>> + * @s:         pointer to seq_file for output
>> + * @unused:    unused parameter
>> + * @return:    0 on success or error code passed from mbi_iosf on failure
>> + */
>> +static int imr_dbgfs_state_show(struct seq_file *s, void *unused)
>
> I didn't remembter if I told you, but please use s->private for the
> imr_dev pointer.
> Everywhere in debugfs calls and if possible in other functions as well.

No missed s->private. Will incorporate for V3.

>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * imr_debugfs_unregister
>> + * Unregister debugfs hooks
>> + *
>> + * @imr:       IMR structure representing address and access masks
>> + * @return:
>> + */
>> +static void imr_debugfs_unregister(void)
>> +{
>> +       if (!imr_dev.file)
>> +               return;
>
> Redundant check. I think I told you that already.

I think you did. V3

>> +static void __init imr_fixup_memmap(void)
>> +{
>> +       unsigned long base  = virt_to_phys(&_text);
>> +       unsigned long size = virt_to_phys(&__end_rodata) - base;
>
> Shouldn't be phys_addr_t ?
> Oh, It might be good for all address parameters in the introduced API.

Well the reference MTRR code doesn't do phs_addr_t
OTOH so what. I think phys_addr_t is more representative of the data 
being passed, so will include @ V3.

>> +               pr_info("protecting kernel .text - .rodata: %ldk (%p - %p)\n",
>> +                       size / 1024, &_text, &__end_rodata);
>
> size >> 10

Andy.

It was size >> 10 for V1 and you called it out as a magic number :)

IMO, size / 1024 requires less thought to understand when reading the code.

>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_IMR_SELFTEST
>> +       /* Run optional self test */
>> +       imr_self_test(base, size);
>> +#endif
>
> I think it makes sense to move this piece to the init.
> I don't see what is exceptional in this function that test belongs here.

Fair enough.

>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
>> +       ret = imr_debugfs_register();
>> +       if (ret != 0)
>> +               return ret;
>
> It's non-fatal error.
> Thus,
> if (ret)
>   pr_warn("DebugFS wasn't initialized\n");
>
> Move it after we have imr_dev in place and supply it to debugfs as a
> private pointer.

Agree

>> + * return:
>> + */
>> +static void __exit imr_exit(void)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
>
> I suspect you may remove all those ifdefs and compiler should shrink
> not used code since debugfs has the stubs.
>
>> +       imr_debugfs_unregister();
>> +#endif
>> +}

Hrmm. I'll revist that @ V3.

Thanks for the quick feedback.

--
BOD

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-22  1:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-21 18:46 [PATCH v2 0/1] x86: Add IMR support to Quark/Galileo Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-21 18:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/1] x86: Add Isolated Memory Regions for Quark X1000 Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-21 20:57   ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-22  1:27     ` Bryan O'Donoghue [this message]
2015-01-22  8:59       ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-22  9:43         ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-22 11:24   ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-01-22 11:38     ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-22 15:02       ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-22 15:15         ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-22 16:28           ` Darren Hart
2015-01-22 19:50           ` Thomas Gleixner
2015-01-24  1:48   ` Ong, Boon Leong
2015-01-24 11:02     ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-01-24 21:56       ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-24 21:58         ` Bryan O'Donoghue
2015-01-24 19:52     ` Bryan O'Donoghue

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=54C05207.6010306@nexus-software.ie \
    --to=pure.logic@nexus-software.ie \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=boon.leong.ong@intel.com \
    --cc=dvhart@infradead.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86: Add Isolated Memory Regions for Quark X1000' \
    /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).