On Tue, Jul 26 2016, 10:39 AM, Andreas Noever wrote:

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Amir Levy [off-list ref]
wrote:

quoted

Adding more Thunderbolt(TM) register definitions and some helper
macros.

Signed-off-by: Amir Levy <redacted>
---
 drivers/thunderbolt/nhi_regs.h | 109
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 109 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi_regs.h

b/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi_regs.h index 75cf069..b8e961f 100644

--- a/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi_regs.h
+++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/nhi_regs.h

@@ -9,6 +9,11 @@

 #include <linux/types.h>

+#define NHI_MMIO_BAR 0
+
+#define TBT_RING_MIN_NUM_BUFFERS       2
+#define TBT_RING_MAX_FRAME_SIZE                (4 * 1024)
+
 enum ring_flags {
        RING_FLAG_ISOCH_ENABLE = 1 << 27, /* TX only? */
        RING_FLAG_E2E_FLOW_CONTROL = 1 << 28, @@ -39,6 +44,33 @@

struct ring_desc {
        u32 time; /* write zero */
 } __packed;

+/**
+ * struct tbt_buf_desc - TX/RX ring buffer descriptor.
+ * This is same as struct ring_desc, but without the use of bitfields
+and
+ * with explicit endianity.
+ */
+struct tbt_buf_desc {
+       __le64 phys;
+       __le32 attributes;
+       __le32 time;
+};

Does sharing this file make sense? The style seems to be quite different
(structs with bitfields vs explicit bit-access). I think I would prefer separate
register definitions, unless you are reusing a substantial amount (I have not
checked).

I'm using all the macros from the original file, except the struct with the bitfields.

Amir