Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 2 February 2017 at 16:37, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On 01/02/17 05:10 AM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> You can keep it roughly as-is if you're ~reasonably certain one won't >> change it in the future. > > I've made the change anyway. I think it's better now. > >> Some teams

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 2 February 2017 at 16:37, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On 01/02/17 05:10 AM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> You can keep it roughly as-is if you're ~reasonably certain one won't >> change it in the future. > > I've made the change anyway. I think it's better now. > >> Some teams frown upon adding new

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 01/02/17 05:10 AM, Emil Velikov wrote: > You can keep it roughly as-is if you're ~reasonably certain one won't > change it in the future. I've made the change anyway. I think it's better now. > Some teams frown upon adding new IOCTL(s) where existing ones can be > made backward/forward

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 01/02/17 05:10 AM, Emil Velikov wrote: > You can keep it roughly as-is if you're ~reasonably certain one won't > change it in the future. I've made the change anyway. I think it's better now. > Some teams frown upon adding new IOCTL(s) where existing ones can be > made backward/forward

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31 January 2017 at 23:13, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Hi Emil, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > On 31/01/17 01:48 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >>> +struct switchtec_ioctl_fw_info { >>> + __u32 flash_length; >>> + >>> + struct { >>> + __u32 address; >>> +

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31 January 2017 at 23:13, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Hi Emil, > > Thanks for the feedback. > > On 31/01/17 01:48 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >>> +struct switchtec_ioctl_fw_info { >>> + __u32 flash_length; >>> + >>> + struct { >>> + __u32 address; >>> + __u32

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Emil, Thanks for the feedback. On 31/01/17 01:48 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> +struct switchtec_ioctl_fw_info { >> + __u32 flash_length; >> + >> + struct { >> + __u32 address; >> + __u32 length; >> + __u32 active; > Something to keep in

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Emil, Thanks for the feedback. On 31/01/17 01:48 PM, Emil Velikov wrote: >> +struct switchtec_ioctl_fw_info { >> + __u32 flash_length; >> + >> + struct { >> + __u32 address; >> + __u32 length; >> + __u32 active; > Something to keep in

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Logan, NOTE: Please take my comments with a healthy pinch of salt. I'd imagine that core/more experienced developers have more thorough feedback, so I'll mention a few things on the less common part - robust/compat UABI. Above all, please read through the in-tree documentation on the topic

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Logan, NOTE: Please take my comments with a healthy pinch of salt. I'd imagine that core/more experienced developers have more thorough feedback, so I'll mention a few things on the less common part - robust/compat UABI. Above all, please read through the in-tree documentation on the topic

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 11:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > Sorry, it was probably me :) Nope, it was Christoph Hellwig. I don't mind changing it. It's just hard to know what's expected all the time. > Why do you need this? Wherever you put it, it should be built as part > of the online kernel

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 11:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > Sorry, it was probably me :) Nope, it was Christoph Hellwig. I don't mind changing it. It's just hard to know what's expected all the time. > Why do you need this? Wherever you put it, it should be built as part > of the online kernel

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:35:44AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On 31/01/17 10:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > That's one big patch to review, would you want to do that? > > Sorry, will do. > > > Can you break it up into smaller parts? At least put the documentation > >

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:35:44AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > > On 31/01/17 10:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > That's one big patch to review, would you want to do that? > > Sorry, will do. > > > Can you break it up into smaller parts? At least put the documentation > >

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 10:49 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > The good news is that your switchtec.txt file is already 99% in the RST > format, so there is little or nothing to do there. > > The bad news is that we don't quite have a place for it yet. This is > really user-space developer documentation, and

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 10:49 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > The good news is that your switchtec.txt file is already 99% in the RST > format, so there is little or nothing to do there. > > The bad news is that we don't quite have a place for it yet. This is > really user-space developer documentation, and

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Logan, [auto build test ERROR on pci/next] [also build test ERROR on v4.10-rc6 next-20170130] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

Hi Logan, [auto build test ERROR on pci/next] [also build test ERROR on v4.10-rc6 next-20170130] [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to help improve the system] url:

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:35:44 -0700 Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > And don't dump a .txt file into Documentation/ anymore, people are > > working to move to the newer format. > > Fair. I wasn't sure where a good place to put it was. Any suggestions? We're working toward a

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 10:35:44 -0700 Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > > And don't dump a .txt file into Documentation/ anymore, people are > > working to move to the newer format. > > Fair. I wasn't sure where a good place to put it was. Any suggestions? We're working toward a rational document

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 10:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > That's one big patch to review, would you want to do that? Sorry, will do. > Can you break it up into smaller parts? At least put the documentation > separately, right? Ha, funny. Last time I sent a patch someone asked for the documentation

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On 31/01/17 10:26 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > That's one big patch to review, would you want to do that? Sorry, will do. > Can you break it up into smaller parts? At least put the documentation > separately, right? Ha, funny. Last time I sent a patch someone asked for the documentation

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:03:24AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Microsemi's "Switchtec" line of PCI switch devices is already well > supported by the kernel with standard PCI switch drivers. However, the > Switchtec device advertises a special management endpoint with a separate > PCI function

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:03:24AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Microsemi's "Switchtec" line of PCI switch devices is already well > supported by the kernel with standard PCI switch drivers. However, the > Switchtec device advertises a special management endpoint with a separate > PCI function

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:03:24AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Microsemi's "Switchtec" line of PCI switch devices is already well > supported by the kernel with standard PCI switch drivers. However, the > Switchtec device advertises a special management endpoint with a separate > PCI function

Re: [PATCH 1/1] MicroSemi Switchtec management interface driver

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:03:24AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Microsemi's "Switchtec" line of PCI switch devices is already well > supported by the kernel with standard PCI switch drivers. However, the > Switchtec device advertises a special management endpoint with a separate > PCI function