[PATCH v2 0/8] powerpc/85xx: p2020: Create one unified machine description

[Pali Rohár]

On Tuesday 14 February 2023 05:47:08 Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 13/02/2023 à 21:11, Pali Rohár a écrit :
> > On Monday 13 February 2023 19:58:15 Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> Le 09/02/2023 à 01:15, Pali Rohár a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch moves all p2020 boards from mpc85xx_rdb.c and mpc85xx_ds.c
> >>>> files into new p2020.c file, and plus it copies all helper functions
> >>>> which p2020 boards requires. This patch does not introduce any new code
> >>>> or functional change. It should be really plain copy/move.
> >>
> >> Yes after looking into it in more details, it is exactly that. You
> >> copied all helper functions but this is not said in the commit message.
> >> I think it should be said, and more important it should be explained why.
> >> Because this is exactly what I was not understanding, why I couldn't see
> >> all moved functions: just because many of them were not moved but copied.
> >>
> >> In the two first pages you made some function static, and then you
> >> duplicated it. Why ? Why not keep it global and just use it from one
> >> place to the other ?
> >>
> >> Because after patch 3 we have:
> >>
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_rdb.c:static void __init
> >> mpc85xx_rdb_pic_init(void)
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p2020.c:static void __init
> >> mpc85xx_rdb_pic_init(void)
> >>
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/mpc85xx_ds.c:static void __init
> >> mpc85xx_ds_pic_init(void)
> >> arch/powerpc/platforms/85xx/p2020.c:static void __init
> >> mpc85xx_ds_pic_init(void)
> >>
> >> Why not just drop patches 1 and 2 and keep those two functions and all
> >> the other common functions like mpc85xx_8259_cascade()
> >> mpc85xx_ds_uli_init() and a lot more  in a separate common file ?
> >>
> >> Christophe
> > 
> > After applying all patches there is no mpc85xx_rdb_pic_init() /
> > mpc85xx_ds_pic_init() function in p2020.c file. There is
> > p2020_pic_init() in p2020.c but it is slightly different than previous
> > two functions.
> 
> Ok, fair enough, but then please explain in the commit message that you 
> copy the functions and then they will be re-written in following 
> patches. That way we know exactly what we are reviewing.

But it is already explained in the commit message. Is not it enough? Or
should I rephrase some parts of the commit message?

> > 
> > Maybe it could be possible to create one function mpc85xx_pic_init() as
> > unification of previous 3 functions, but such change would be needed to
> > test on lot of mpc85xx boards, which would be affected by such change.
> > And I do not have them for testing. I have only P2020.
> 
> No, if the function are different it's better each platform has its own. 
> My comment was for functions that are exactly the same.
> 
> > 
> > So I wrote *_pic_init() function which is p2020 specific, like already
> > existing ds and rdb specific functions in their own source files.