Re: [PATCH v5 4/9] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables

[Jeremy Linton]

On 12/12/2017 05:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > On 12/12/2017 11:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >
>
> [cut]

(trimming list)

> > > > > What about converting this to using struct fwnode instead of adding
> > > > > fields to it?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I didn't really want to add another field here, but I've also pointed out
> > > > how I thought converting it to a fwnode wasn't a good choice.
> > > >
> > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/20/502
> > > >
> > > > Mostly because IMHO its even more misleading (lacking any
> > > > fwnode_operations)
> > > > than misusing the of_node as a void *.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what you mean.
> >
> >
> > Converting the DT drivers/cacheinfo.c code to use a fwnode_handle is
> > straightforward. But IMHO it doesn't solve the readability problem of either
> > casting the ACPI/PPTT token directly to the resulting fwnode_handle *, or
> > alternatively an actual fwnode_handle with bogus fwnode_operations to wrap
> > that token.
>
> I'm not talking about that at all.
>
> > > Anyway, the idea is to have one pointer in there instead of two that
> > > cannot be used at the same time and there's no reason why of_node
> > > should be special.
> >
> >
> >          Avoid two pointers for size, or readability? Because the last
> > version had a union with of_node, which isn't strictly necessary as I can
> > just cast the pptt token to of_node. There is exactly one line of code after
> > that which uses the token and it doesn't care about type.
>
> So call this field "token" or similar.  Don't call it "of_node" and
> don't introduce another "firmware_node" thing in addition to that.
> That just is a mess, sorry.

I sort of agree, I think I can just change the whole of_node to a 
generic 'void *firmware_unique' which works fine for the PPTT code, it 
should also work for the DT code in cache_leaves_are_shared().

The slight gocha is there is a bit of DT code which initially runs 
earlier that uses of_node as an indirect parameter to a couple functions 
(by just passing the cacheinfo). Let me see if I can tweak that a bit.

Frankly, If I understood completely all the *priv cases I suspect it 
might be possible to collapse *of_node into that as well. That is as 
long as no one decides to flush out DT on x86, or PPTT on x86.