The included opal.h gives a wrong idea that CXL makes PPC OPAL calls
while it does not so let's remote it.
Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <redacted>
---
drivers/misc/cxl/pci.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
From: Andrew Donnellan <hidden> Date: 2018-09-28 07:49:34
On 28/9/18 4:38 pm, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
The included opal.h gives a wrong idea that CXL makes PPC OPAL calls
while it does not so let's remote it.
Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <redacted>
Thanks for catching this
Acked-by: Andrew Donnellan <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-09-28 12:51:18
Alexey Kardashevskiy [off-list ref] writes:
The included opal.h gives a wrong idea that CXL makes PPC OPAL calls
while it does not so let's remote it.
But it does use eg.
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_SNOOP_ON
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_CAPI
Which come from opal-api.h via opal.h.
So you should at least include opal-api.h.
cheers
The included opal.h gives a wrong idea that CXL makes PPC OPAL calls
while it does not so let's remote it.
But it does use eg.
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_SNOOP_ON
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_CAPI
Which come from opal-api.h via opal.h.
So you should at least include opal-api.h.
I'd say that since it includes pnv-pci.h (and this is why this patch
compiles), it should be a different set of values for powernv (which
would map 1:1 to OPAL_PHB_xxx). The powernv platform knowledge is
already intimate enough for a driver to have. Dunno, I found this opal.h
inclusion confusing, that's all.
Le 03/10/2018 à 09:46, Alexey Kardashevskiy a écrit :
On 28/09/2018 22:46, Michael Ellerman wrote:
quoted
Alexey Kardashevskiy [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
The included opal.h gives a wrong idea that CXL makes PPC OPAL calls
while it does not so let's remote it.
But it does use eg.
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_SNOOP_ON
OPAL_PHB_CAPI_MODE_CAPI
Which come from opal-api.h via opal.h.
So you should at least include opal-api.h.
I'd say that since it includes pnv-pci.h (and this is why this patch
compiles), it should be a different set of values for powernv (which
would map 1:1 to OPAL_PHB_xxx). The powernv platform knowledge is
already intimate enough for a driver to have. Dunno, I found this opal.h
inclusion confusing, that's all.
I agree, it would be the cleaner way of doing it. It's going to be
pretty low on my list though...
Fred