Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-25 Thread Lukas Wunner
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 09:09:37PM +0200, Andreas Noever wrote: > (and of course I have to request > this at least once: you should definitely release the spec - I highly > doubt that Intel's competitive advantage depends on keeping this > linked list technology secret ;) ). "next year Intel

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-25 Thread Lukas Wunner
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 09:09:37PM +0200, Andreas Noever wrote: > (and of course I have to request > this at least once: you should definitely release the spec - I highly > doubt that Intel's competitive advantage depends on keeping this > linked list technology secret ;) ). "next year Intel

RE: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-22 Thread Levy, Amir (Jer)
On Mon, May 22 2017, 12:45 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > I'm not sure it is good idea to use bit fields here at all. I'm not an expert > in C > but I remember reading somewhere that they are not suitable for representing > fields inside hardware registers. >

RE: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-22 Thread Levy, Amir (Jer)
On Mon, May 22 2017, 12:45 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > I'm not sure it is good idea to use bit fields here at all. I'm not an expert > in C > but I remember reading somewhere that they are not suitable for representing > fields inside hardware registers. >

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-22 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 09:09:37PM +0200, Andreas Noever wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Mika Westerberg > wrote: > > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-22 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 09:09:37PM +0200, Andreas Noever wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Mika Westerberg > wrote: > > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > > follows how

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-21 Thread Andreas Noever
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-21 Thread Andreas Noever
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new functions >

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-19 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 07:38:29PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg >> wrote: >> One nit here. >> Both has quite similar

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-19 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 07:38:29PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg >> wrote: >> One nit here. >> Both has quite similar bodies. >> Wouldn't be nice to split out a helper which takes

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-19 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 07:38:29PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg > wrote: > > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-19 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 07:38:29PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg > wrote: > > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > > follows how

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-18 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new

Re: [PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-18 Thread Andy Shevchenko
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random > after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it > follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new functions >

[PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new functions (tb_switch_find_vsec_cap() and tb_port_find_cap()) which can be used to extract

[PATCH 05/24] thunderbolt: Rework capability handling

2017-05-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
Organization of the capabilities in switches and ports is not so random after all. Rework the capability handling functionality so that it follows how capabilities are organized and provide two new functions (tb_switch_find_vsec_cap() and tb_port_find_cap()) which can be used to extract