Re: [PATCH v4 12/23] ata: libahci: Extend port-cmd flags set with port capabilities
From: Damien Le Moal <hidden>
Date: 2022-06-18 06:52:42
Also in:
linux-ide, lkml
On 6/18/22 05:31, Serge Semin wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2022 at 09:28:18AM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:quoted
On 2022/06/16 5:58, Serge Semin wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 05:32:41PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:quoted
On 6/10/22 17:17, Serge Semin wrote:quoted
Currently not all of the Port-specific capabilities listed in thes/listed/are listedquoted
PORT_CMD-enumeration. Let's extend that set with the Cold Presence Detection and Mechanical Presence Switch attached to the Port flags [1] so to closeup the set of the platform-specific port-capabilities flags. Note these flags are supposed to be set by the platform firmware if there is one. Alternatively as we are about to do they can be set by means of the OF properties. While at it replace PORT_IRQ_DEV_ILCK with PORT_IRQ_DMPS and fix the comment there. In accordance with [2] that IRQ flag is supposed to indicate the state of the signal coming from the Mechanical Presence Switch. [1] Serial ATA AHCI 1.3.1 Specification, p.27 [2] Serial ATA AHCI 1.3.1 Specification, p.24, p.88 Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <redacted> Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de> --- Changelog v4: - Fix the DMPS macros name in the patch log. (@Sergei Shtylyov) --- drivers/ata/ahci.h | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/drivers/ata/ahci.h b/drivers/ata/ahci.h index 7d834deefeb9..f501531bd1b3 100644 --- a/drivers/ata/ahci.h +++ b/drivers/ata/ahci.h@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ enum { PORT_IRQ_BAD_PMP = (1 << 23), /* incorrect port multiplier */ PORT_IRQ_PHYRDY = (1 << 22), /* PhyRdy changed */ - PORT_IRQ_DEV_ILCK = (1 << 7), /* device interlock */ + PORT_IRQ_DMPS = (1 << 7), /* mechanical presence status */ PORT_IRQ_CONNECT = (1 << 6), /* port connect change status */ PORT_IRQ_SG_DONE = (1 << 5), /* descriptor processed */ PORT_IRQ_UNK_FIS = (1 << 4), /* unknown FIS rx'd */@@ -166,6 +166,8 @@ enum { PORT_CMD_ATAPI = (1 << 24), /* Device is ATAPI */ PORT_CMD_FBSCP = (1 << 22), /* FBS Capable Port */ PORT_CMD_ESP = (1 << 21), /* External Sata Port */ + PORT_CMD_CPD = (1 << 20), /* Cold Presence Detection */ + PORT_CMD_MPSP = (1 << 19), /* Mechanical Presence Switch */ PORT_CMD_HPCP = (1 << 18), /* HotPlug Capable Port */ PORT_CMD_PMP = (1 << 17), /* PMP attached */ PORT_CMD_LIST_ON = (1 << 15), /* cmd list DMA engine running */@@ -181,6 +183,9 @@ enum { PORT_CMD_ICC_PARTIAL = (0x2 << 28), /* Put i/f in partial state */ PORT_CMD_ICC_SLUMBER = (0x6 << 28), /* Put i/f in slumber state */ + PORT_CMD_CAP = PORT_CMD_HPCP | PORT_CMD_MPSP | + PORT_CMD_CPD | PORT_CMD_ESP | PORT_CMD_FBSCP,quoted
What is this one for ? A comment above it would be nice.Isn't it obviously inferrable from the definition and the item name?quoted
I am guessing from the name. Am I guessing OK ? A comment would still be nice. Why just these bits ? There are more cap/support indicator bits in that port cmd bitfield. So why this particular set of bits ? What do they mean all together ?Normally the variable/constant name should be self-content (as the kernel coding style doc states and what the common sense suggests). So the reader could correctly guess its purpose/content/value. In this case PORT_CMD_CAP - means PORT CMD capabilities mask. All of the possible flags have been set in that mask. There are no more capabilities in the PORT CMD register left undeclared. That's why the name is selected the way it is and why I haven't added any comment in here (what the kernel coding style says about the over-commenting the code).
Yes, I understood from the name what it is. What I do NOT understand is why all the feature bits are not there. Why this subset only ? A comment about that would be nice so that the reason for it is not lost.
quoted
Sure I can go and read the specs to figure it out. But again, a comment would avoid readers of the code to have to decrypt all that.If you still insist on having an additional comment. I can add something like "/* PORT_CMD capabilities mask */". Are you ok with it?
That does not help on its own. The macro name says that already. I would like a note about why only these features are selected.
-Sergeyquoted
quoted
-Sergeyquoted
quoted
+ /* PORT_FBS bits */ PORT_FBS_DWE_OFFSET = 16, /* FBS device with error offset */ PORT_FBS_ADO_OFFSET = 12, /* FBS active dev optimization offset */-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research