Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] fpga: manager: change status api prototype, don't use older
From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com>
Date: 2022-08-18 02:38:32
Also in:
linux-fpga, lkml
On 2022-08-17 at 11:16:14 +0000, Manne, Nava kishore wrote:
Hi Yilun, Please find my response inline.quoted
-----Original Message----- From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@intel.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 2:02 PM To: Nava kishore Manne <redacted> Cc: michal.simek@xilinx.com; hao.wu@intel.com; trix@redhat.com; mdf@kernel.org; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; ronak.jain@xilinx.com; rajan.vaja@xilinx.com; abhyuday.godhasara@xilinx.com; piyush.mehta@xilinx.com; harsha.harsha@xilinx.com; lakshmi.sai.krishna.potthuri@xilinx.com; linux-arm- kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- fpga@vger.kernel.org; git@xilinx.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] fpga: manager: change status api prototype, don't use older On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 02:58:31PM +0530, Nava kishore Manne wrote:quoted
Different vendors have different error sets defined by Hardware. If we always define the new bits when we cannot find an exact 1:1 mapping in the core the 64 bits would soon be used out. Also, it's hard to understand the mixture of different error sets. To address these issues updated the status interface to handle the vendor-specific messages in a generic way. With the updated status interface the vendor-specific driver files can independently handle the error messages.I think we don't have to provide the vendor specific HW errors in a generic way, maybe the vendor specific drivers could handle them by its own device attributes. Since the output value set of the interface is specific to each driver, users should still interpret them in specific manners. So doesn't see much value for a class interface.Agree, vendor specific drivers could handle them by its own device attributes. If it is the case, can we remove the existing status interface relevant changes from the core?
We don't have to. Some *user* interfaces may become hard to use as time goes, but we still try to make them stable as there are exsiting users working on them once they are released. That also means we should be more careful when introducing new user interfaces. Thanks, Yilun
Regards, Navakishore
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel